Gauhati High Court
Prabhat Narzary vs The Bodoland Territorial Council ... on 3 November, 2022
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010216352022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/6801/2022
PRABHAT NARZARY
S/O- SRI GHASHIRAM NARZARY, R/O- VILL. SIDLI, P.O. SIDLI, P.S. BIJNI,
DIST. CHIRANG, BTAD, ASSAM, PIN- 783393.
VERSUS
THE BODOLAND TERRITORIAL COUNCIL AND 4 ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, BTC, KOKRAJHAR,
ASSAM, PIN- 783370.
2:THE JOINT SECRETARY
HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT
BTC
KOKRAJHAR
ASSAM
PIN- 783370.
3:THE DEPUTY SECRETARY
HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT
BTC
KOKRAJHAR
ASSAM
PIN- 783370.
4:THE DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SEVICES
BTC
KOKRAJHAR
ASSAM
PIN- 783370.
5:THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES
CHIRANG
Page No.# 2/4
KAJALGAON
BTAD
ASSAM
PIN- 783385
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S BHUYAN
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, BTC
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA
ORDER
03.11.2022
Heard Mr. A. Kundu, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P. Nayak,
learned counsel for all the respondents.
2. The petitioner prays for setting aside the suspension order dated
29.08.2019 and for reinstating him into service, in terms of the judgment of the
Apex Court in the case of Ajay Kumar Chaudhary vs. Union of India and
Another, reported in (2015) 7 SCC 291.
3. The petitioner's counsel submits that the petitioner had been arrested on
23.06.2019, in a case registered under Section 9/29/44/49B/51 of the Wild Life
Protection At, 1972 and he was released on bail on 14.08.2019. The petitioner
was placed under suspension w.e.f. 23.06.2019, vide order dated 29.08.2019.
4. The petitioner's counsel submits that in terms of the judgment of the Apex
Court in Ajay Kumar Chaudhary (supra), charge-sheet has to be filed in the
Page No.# 3/4
criminal case within 3 (three) months and/or departmental proceeding has to be
initiated within three months from the date of the suspension order, failing
which the currency of the suspension order cannot be extended. Further, the
Apex Court has held that even if charge-sheet is filed in the criminal case and/or
departmental proceeding is initiated within three months, the respondents
would have to pass a reasoned order for the suspension to be extended.
5. Mr. P. Nayak, learned counsel for the respondents submits that no
departmental proceeding has been initiated against the petitioner till date. He
also submits that no review of the suspension order has been undertaken by the
respondents, for extension of the petitioner's suspension.
6. On considering the fact that there is nothing to show as to whether any
charge-sheet has been filed in the criminal case against the petitioner till today,
it is presumed that no charge-sheet has been filed in the criminal case. Further,
in view of the fact that no departmental proceeding is initiated against the
petitioner and no review of the suspension order has been undertaken by the
State respondents, the suspension of the petitioner cannot continue, in terms of
the judgment of the Apex Court in Ajay Kumar Chaudhary (supra).
7. In view of the reasons stated above, the order dated 29.08.2019 cannot
be operational any longer. Accordingly, the petitioner's suspension is set aside
and the respondents are directed to reinstate the petitioner into service.
However, liberty is given to the State respondents to transfer the petitioner to
any of it's offices within the State, so as to sever any local or personal contact
Page No.# 4/4
he may have with any person, who may be involved in the investigation against
the petitioner. Further, the petitioner may be barred from dealing with files
connected with the investigation of the case, till the time of preparation of his
written statement of defence or filing of the charge-sheet.
8. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
