Md. Rashid Ali vs State Of Manipur & Anr
2022 Latest Caselaw 51 Mani

                                                                          Item No. 4
                                                                   (Through video conferencing)
      LHAINEICHO
      NG HAOKIP                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
      Digitally signed by
      LHAINEICHONG HAOKIP
                                                   AT IMPHAL
      Date: 2022.02.18
      13:33:33 +05'30'

                                               WP(C) No. 266 of 2021
Md. Rashid Ali
                                                                           .... Petitioner/s
                                                     - Versus -

State of Manipur & Anr.
                                                               .... Respondent/s

BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AHANTHEM BIMOL SINGH 18.02.2022

[1] Heard Mr. Ph. Sanajaoba, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

and Mr. Lenin Hijam, learned Addl. AG appearing for the respondents.

The present writ petition have been filed with the prayer for

quashing the impugned suspension order dated 21.01.2020 by which the

petitioner had been placed under suspension in contemplation of a

departmental enquiry against him.

[2] The brief facts of the present case is that while the petitioner was

serving as Social Worker, DCPU, Tamenglong in Social Welfare Department,

Manipur, he was placed under suspension by the Director of Social Welfare

by issuing the impugned order dated 21.01.2020 in exercise of the power

conferred by Sub-rule (2) (a) of Rule 10 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 in

contemplation of a disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner.

[3] The simple case of the petitioner is that the respondents did not take

up any action for reviewing the suspension order before expiry of 90 (ninety)

days as contemplated under Rule 10 (7) of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 and

accordingly, the impugned suspension order is not sustainable in the eye of

law. In the counter affidavit filed by the respondents, the allegation made by

the petitioner has not been controverted in any manner. Situated thus with

these undisputed facts, this Court is of the considered view that the prolong

suspension of the petitioner without taking up any steps by the authorities for

extension of his suspension as contemplated under Rule 10 (7) of the CCS

(CCA) Rules is bad in law and unsustainable. In the result, the impugned

suspension order dated 21.01.2020 is hereby quashed and set aside and the

respondents are directed to reinstate the petitioner back in service forthwith.

[4] Mr. Lenin Hijam, learned Addl. AG submitted before this Court that the

departmental enquiry against the petitioner has been deferred pending the

criminal proceedings against the petitioner in view of the decision taken by the

Government as contain in its letter dated 30.01.2021 of the Secretariat, Social

Welfare Department Department, which is enclosed as Annexure A/3 in the

counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents.

[5] Mr. Lenin Hijam, learned Addl. AG also submitted that the said

decision is in conformity with the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex

Court in the case of "Captain M. Paul Anthony Vs. Bharat Gold Mines Ltd."

reported in (1999) 3 SCC 679 (Para 22). In view of the above, it has been

submitted by the learned Addl. AG that the authorities may not be barred from

proceedings with the contemplated disciplinary proceedings against the

petitioner after closure of the criminal cases pending against him.

[6] Needless to mention here that this Court is not at all interfering with

the liberty of the authorities to proceed with the disciplinary proceedings

contemplated against the petitioner by this order and that this order passed by

this Court confines to only legality or sustainability of the impugned

suspension order and nothing more.

With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petition is disposed

of.

JUDGE

Lhaineichong