Santanu Das vs The State Of Assam And Anr
2022 Latest Caselaw 1278 Gua

                                                                    Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010063232022




                              THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
   (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                                 Case No. : WP(C)/2311/2022

            SANTANU DAS
            S/O SRI TARUN CH. KACHARI, R/O FLAT NO. 2A, 2ND FLOOR, OM
            ENCLAVE, LAKHIMINAGAR, P.O. AND P.S.-HATIGAON, DIST- KAMRUP,
            ASSAM



            VERSUS

            THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
            REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM,
            DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN AFFAIRS, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6

            2:THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM
             DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN AFFAIRS
             DISPUR
             GUWAHATI-

Advocate for the Petitioner   : DR. B AHMED

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM
                                                                          Page No.# 2/3



                                 BEFORE
               HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA

                                      ORDER

Date : 08-04-2022

Heard Mr. N. Haque, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. J.K. Goswami, learned counsel for the State respondents.

The petitioner's case is that he was suspended on 05.08.2021 w.e.f. 01.07.2021.

The petitioner's counsel submits that in terms of the judgment of the Apex Court in Ajay Kumar Choudhury Vs. Union of India & Others reported in (2015) 7 SCC 291, the suspension order cannot be sustained unless Charge-sheet or Memo of Charge is submitted within 3 (three) months from the date of the suspension order. He further submits that no review/decision has been taken by the respondent authorities to extend the suspension period.

This Court vide order dated 01.04.2022 had directed the State respondents to obtain instructions as to whether a review had been undertaken for extending the suspension order.

Mr. J.K. Goswami, learned counsel for the State respondents submits that a proposal has been sent for re-instating the petitioner into service.

On considering the submission made by the learned counsel for the respondents, it is clear that no review had been undertaken by the respondent authorities to extend the suspension period of the petitioner. Further, no Charge-

Page No.# 3/3

sheet/Memorandum of Charge has been submitted.

Accordingly, in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in Ajay Kumar Choudhury (supra) and in terms of the judgment of the Apex Court in Union of India & Others Vs. Dipak Mali reported in 2010 2 SCC 222, the suspension order dated 05.08.2021 is set aside.

The petitioner should be re-instated into service, with liberty being given to the State respondents to post him in any of their offices, so that he will not be able to exert his influence, with regard to any proceeding that may be initiated against the petitioner.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant