Pranjal Kakati vs The State Of Assam And 4 Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 2841 Gua

                                                                     Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010032062022




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

                                 Case No. : WP(C)/1429/2022

            PRANJAL KAKATI
            S/O LATE MRIGEN KAKATI, R/O VILL- NO. 2 GALIAHATI, BARPETA,
            ASSAM-781301


            VERSUS

            THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS
            REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT.
            OF ASSAM, WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6

            2:THE CHIEF ENGINEER
            WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT
             CHANDMARI
             GUWAHATI-3

            3:THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF ENGINEER
             LOWER ASSAM ZONE
            WATER RESORCES DEPARTMENT
             CHANDMARI
             GUWAHATI-3

            4:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
             BARPETA WATER RESOURCES DIVISION
             BARPETA
            ASSAM -781301

            5:THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER
             MUKALMUA PROTECTION CIRCLE
            WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT
             DIST-BARPETA
            ASSAM-78130

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. R MAZUMDAR
                                                                      Page No.# 2/4


Advocate for the Respondent : SC, WATER RESOURCE




                                 BEFORE
               HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA

                                      ORDER

Date : 08-08-2022

Heard Mr. H Bezbarua, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. RM Das, learned counsel for all the respondents.

The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner's suspension, vide Office Order No.481 dated 04.05.2022 w.e.f. 03.04.2021, is still being effect to, despite no review for extension of the same having been made subsequent to the order dated 07.10.2021, which is in violation of the judgment of the Apex Court in Ajay Kumar Choudhary Vs Union of India & Anr., reported in (2015) 7 SCC 291, Union of India & Others vs. Dipak Mali, reported in (2010) 2 SCC 222, the orders of this Court passed in WP(C) 2863/2018 (Dr. A.K. Adhyapok vs. State of Assam & 3 Others) and WP(C) 6136/2021 (Kuppum Venkatesh Srikanth & Kuppum Venkatash Srikanth vs. The Indian Institute of Technology & 3 Others).

The petitioner's counsel submits that the petitioner was placed under suspension vide Office Order No.481 dated 04.05.2022 w.e.f. 03.04.2021 in relation to Barpeta P.S Case No.760/2021. Thereafter, charge-sheet was filed against the petitioner in Barpeta P.S Case No.760/2021 under Section 457/380 of IPC on 17.06.2021. A Review of the petitioner's suspension order was undertaken by the State respondents and order for extension issued on 07.10.2021 However, subsequent to 07.10.2021, there has been no further review undertaken by the respondents, to extend the suspension of the Page No.# 3/4

petitioner.

Mr. H Bezbarua, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a departmental proceeding had also been initiated against the petitioner on 09.06.2021. However, vide the order dated 07.10.2021, the said order which had extended the petitioner's suspension, had also closed the departmental proceeding initiated against the petitioner. He submits that only the criminal proceeding is still pending against the petitioner and as there has been no review of the suspension order subsequent to the order dated 07.10.2021, the review order would have to be set aside.

Mr. RM Das, learned counsel for the respondents submits that he has got the official records and the records show that there has been 4 (four) reviews of the suspension order undertaken by the respondents. He submits that the petitioner's suspension order has been extended vide orders dated 07.10.2021, 03.01.2022, 10.04.2022 and 28.06.2022. He accordingly submits that the extension of the suspension period having been done in terms of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Ajay Kumar Choudhary (supra), the writ petition should be dismissed.

I have heard the counsels for the parties.

In the case of Ajay Kumar Choudhary (supra), the Apex Court has held that the suspension order should not extend beyond 3 (three) months, if within this period, the memo of charges/charge-sheet is not served on the delinquent officer/employee. It also states that if the memo of charges/charge-sheet is served, a reasoned order must be passed for the extension of the suspension order. Accordingly in terms of the judgment of the Apex Court stated above, a reasoned order must be passed for the extension of the suspension order, even Page No.# 4/4

if memo of charges/charge-sheet is initiated/filed against the petitioner.

In the present case, the Departmental Proceeding was initiated against the petitioner on 06.08.2021. However, no review of the petitioner's suspension order had been undertaken within 3 (three) months from the date of issue of the suspension order. The official records show that the extension of the suspension order was made by order dated 07.10.2022. Thereafter, various other orders have been issued on 03.01.2022, 10.04.2022 and 28.06.2022, extending the suspension of the petitioner.

The petitioner's counsel submits that the above said orders extending the suspension order has not been communicated to the petitioner.

List the matter again after 2 (two) weeks.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant