Ranjit Goswami vs The State Of Assam And 3 Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 1196 Gua

                                                                  Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010062152023




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

                                 Case No. : WP(C)/1676/2023

            RANJIT GOSWAMI
            S/O- LATE RAMA PRASANNA GOSWAMI, R/O- VILLAGE- SAWTALBASTI,
            P.O. ERALIGOOL, DIST.- KARIMGANJ, ASSAM, PIN- 788723



            VERSUS

            THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS
            REP. BY THE COMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, REVENUE AND
            DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPTT., ASSAM SECRETARIAT, DISPUR,
            ASSAM-06

            2:THE DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS AND SURVEYS
            ASSAM
             RUPNAGAR
             GUWAHATI- 32

            3:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
             KARIMGANJ
            ASSAM
             PIN- 788710

            4:THE CIRCLE OFFICER
             KARIMGANJ SADAR CIRCLE
             KARIMGANJ
            ASSAM
             PIN- 78871

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. S K TALUKDAR

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM

Page No.# 2/4

BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH

24.03.2023

Heard Mr. S. K. Talukdar, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S. Dutta, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 & 2 as well as Mr. H. Sarma, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.3 & 4.

Issue notice making it returnable on 10.04.2023.

As the respondents are duly represented by their respective counsels, extra copies of the writ petition be served upon them during the course of the day.

The case of the petitioner herein is that he was arrested on 26.08.2022 in connection with ACB P.S. Case No.34/2022. Thereupon on 28.09.2022, the petitioner was enlarged on bail by the Court of Special Judge, Assam. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner joined the service on 30.09.2022. Subsequent thereto, the Appointing Authority on coming to learn that the petitioner was arrested on 26.08.2022 and he had remained in custody for a period of more than 48 hours had put the petitioner under suspension with effect from 26.08.2022 vide the order dated 29.10.2022 impugned in the instant proceedings. There was a challenge to the said suspension order in WP(C) No.8389/2022 and this Court vide an order dated 02.01.2023, disposed of the same directing the respondent No.3 to pass a reasoned order upon examination of the claim of the petitioner for vacating the suspension order. It appears that an order dated 01.02.2023 Page No.# 3/4

was passed by the respondent No.3 wherein it has been mentioned that considering the seriousness of the charges against the petitioner, it has been decided by the Disciplinary Authority to continue the suspension period till the conclusion of the enquiry. It however, appears from Annexure-9 to the writ petition that the said order dated 01.02.2023 along with various other documents were furnished to the petitioner on 06.03.2023. The subject matter as mentioned in the communication dated 06.03.2023 also gives an impression that the said order dated 01.02.2023 is in connection with the prayer petition of the petitioner.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present writ petition has been filed challenging the suspension order on two counts; first, the suspension order was passed on 29.10.2022 giving it retrospective operation from 26.08.2022 and without taking into consideration that the petitioner upon being enlarged on bail was allowed to join his service on 30.09.2022. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the respondents are well aware of the fact that he has been enlarged on bail. Under such circumstances, the question of suspension order continuing beyond 3 (three) months from 29.10.2022 would be in violation to the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Ajay Kumar Choudhury vs. The Union of India, reported in (2015) 7 SCC 291 as well as the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the

case of Rakibuddin Ahmed vs. State of Assam and Others , reported in (2020) 2 GLR 621.

The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.3 & 4 shall apprise this Court on the next returnable date as to whether the Memorandum of charge/charge sheet has been served upon the Page No.# 4/4

petitioner. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.3 & 4 shall also produce such Memorandum of charge/charge sheet, if any.

Further to that, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.3 & 4 shall also obtain instructions as to whether there has been compliance to the judgment of the Supreme Court rendered in the case of Ajay Kumar Choudhury (supra) as well as Office Memorandum dated 04.02.2020 issued by the Personnel Department of the Government of Assam.

List accordingly.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant