Pallab Das vs The State Of Assam And 3 Ors
2024 Latest Caselaw 481 Gua

Gauhati High Court

Pallab Das vs The State Of Assam And 3 Ors on 30 January, 2024

Author: Soumitra Saikia

Bench: Soumitra Saikia

                                                                     Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010275122023




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

                                 Case No. : WP(C)/7188/2023

            PALLAB DAS
            S/O- PRANAB KUMAR DAS @ NANTU, R/O- VILL. KUDALI, P.S. RATABARI,
            DIST. KARIMGANJ, ASSAM



            VERSUS

            THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS
            TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF
            ASSAM, DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06

            2:THE DIRECTOR
             ELEMENTARY EDUCATION
            ASSAM
             KAHILIPARA
             GUWAHATI-19

            3:THE DISTRICT ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OFFICER
             HAILAKANDI
            ASSAM
             PIN- 788155

            4:THE BLOCK ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OFFICER
             KATLICHERRA
             DIST.- HAILAKANDI
            ASSAM
             PIN- 78815

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. M H LASKAR

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, ELEM. EDU
                                                                          Page No.# 2/3


                                 BEFORE
                  HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA

                                      ORDER

30.01.2024

Heard Mr. M.H. Laskar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P.N.

Sharma, learned Standing Counsel, Elementary Education Department.

2] This writ petition is filed by the petitioner being aggrieved by the order dated

19.06.2023 whereby the petitioner was placed under suspension under Rule 6 (1)

of the Disciplinary and Appeal Rules of 1964 as the petitioner was reported to

have been arrested and that he had remained in judicial custody for more than 48

hours. The petitioner was allowed to draw subsistence allowance as admissible

under the Rules. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although the

petitioner was suspended with effect from 18.06.2023, however, as required under

the provisions of law, there was no review of his suspension and in terms of the

principle of law a laid down by the Apex Court in Ajoy Kumar Choudhury vs. Union

of India reported in (2015) 7 SCC 291 and followed in several judgments rendered

by this High Court, the suspension order was required to be interfered with.

3] Earlier on 19.01.2024 the learned Standing Counsel, Elementary Education

Department was permitted time to obtain required instructions in the matter.

4] Today when the matter was called up, Mr. P.N. Sharma, learned Standing

Counsel, Elementary Education Department has placed before the Court an order Page No.# 3/3

dated 28.01.2024 passed by the Director, Elementary Education Department,

whereby the petitioner was reinstated in service with immediate effect pending

drawal of the departmental proceedings.

5] In that view of the matter, the grievance of the petitioner that the petitioner

is not reinstated to his service due to his suspension is no longer present.

6] Accordingly, in view of the order passed by the Director, Elementary

Education Department on 28.01.2024 reinstating the petitioner with immediate

effect in his original place of posting, the writ petition stands closed as not pressed.

7] A copy of this order dated 28.01.2024 passed by the Director, Elementary

Education Department is retained in the case records.

8] It is, however, made clear that any pending dues payable to the petitioner

should be released by the Department forthwith as per the provisions of law.

9] The writ petition stands disposed of in terms of the above.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant