Pinaki Debnath vs The State Of Assam And 3 Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 4640 Gua

                                                                  Page No.# 1/2

GAHC010230822023




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

                          Case No. : WP(C)/6079/2023

         PINAKI DEBNATH
         S/O SRI PRADIP DEBNATH, VILL-TITAGURI (BHABANIPUR), P.O.-
         TITAGURI, P.S.-KOKRAJHAR, DIST-KOKRAJHAR (BTAD), ASSAM, PIN-
         783374

         VERSUS

         THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS
         REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM,
         REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT, ASSAM
         SECRETARIAT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6

         2:THE DEPUTY SECRETARY
          REVENUE (LR) AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
          E-BLOCK
         ASSAM SECRETARIAT
          DISPUR
          GUWAHATI-06

         3:DISTRICT COMMISSIONER AND DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY
          NAGAON
          OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
          NAGAON
          DIST- NAGAON
         ASSAM
          PIN-782001

         4:THE CIRCLE OFFICER
          DHING REVENUE CIRCLE
          NAGAON
          DIST- NAGAON
         ASSAM
          PIN-78212
                                                                           Page No.# 2/2

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. M SARANIA

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPT

                                  BEFORE
                HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA

                                         ORDER

16.11.2023 Heard Mr. S. Sarania, learned counsel for the petitioner, who submits that the petitioner was placed under suspension on 24.03.2023 as he was arrested in a criminal case. The petitioner was released on bail on 06.05.2023 and he intimated the authorities with regard to his release on bail on 21.06.2023. Show-cause-notice was issued to the petitioner on 07.09.2023 and the petitioner made reply to the same on 25.09.2023.

The petitioner's counsel submits that the petitioner should be reinstated in service as the review for extension of the suspension order had not been made within 90 (ninety) days, in terms of the judgment of the Apex Court in Ajay Kumar Choudhary vs. Union of India & Another, reported in (2015) 7 SCC 291.

On the other hand, Mr. D. Borah, learned counsel for the respondents submits that in terms of the judgment and order dated 17.02.2023 passed in WP(C) No.455/2023, the period of ninety days for review, for the extension of the suspension order, would have to be counted from 21.06.2023, i.e. the date the authorities were informed of the release of the petitioner on bail.

List this matter on 20.11.2023.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant