Manipur High Court
W.Kemeshwor Singh vs State Of Manipur & 2 Ors on 24 July, 2024
Author: A.Guneshwar Sharma
Bench: A.Guneshwar Sharma
71-72
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
AT IMPHAL
WP(C) No.854 of 2023 with
MC (WP(C)) No.424 of 2023
W.Kemeshwor Singh ... Petitioner
-Versus-
State of Manipur & 2 Ors ... Respondents
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.GUNESHWAR SHARMA
24.07.2024
Heard Mr.M.Hemchandra, learned senior counsel assisted
by Mr.M.Randy, learned counsel for the petitioner, Ms.Ch.Sundari,
learned Government Advocate for the State and Mr.Kaminikumar,
learned counsel for respondent No.3.
Mr.M.Hemchandra, learned senior counsel for the
petitioner submits that the petitioner, who was working as Executive
Engineer in the Manipur Industrial Dev Corpn Ltd (MANIDCO) was kept
under suspension vide order dated 3.8.2023 by the Managing
Director/respondent No.3, under Sub Rule (1) of Rule 10 of the CCS
(CCA) Rules, 1965 in contemplation of a departmental proceeding
against him. The suspension order was extended by an order dated
26.10.2023 and 2nd extension order was made vide order dated 2.2.2024
for another three months. It is stated that two weeks expired on
3.5.2024 and admittedly no further extension has been issued by
respondent No.3.
Mr.M.Hemchandra, learned senior counsel draws attention
of this Court to the provisions of Rule 10 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 where
sub Rule (6) contemplates that review and extension after suspension
prior to expiry of stipulated 90 days and no suspension order made
under Sub Rule (1) and (2) shall not be valid after stipulated period of
90 days unless it is extended before expiry date. In the present case,
the first extension was made after 90 days and it is submitted that the
extension order dated 26.10.2023 is not valid in the eye of law and after
the 2nd extension order dated 2.2.2024 there is no further extension in
terms of sub Rule (6) of Rule 10 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 and
suspension of the petitioner can no longer survive in the eye of law.
Mr.M.Hemchandra, learned senior counsel, refers to the
Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in Union Of India &
Ors vs Dipak Mali: 2010 (2) SCC 222 where it is stipulated that review
or extension of suspension order under Rule 10 Sub Rule (1) and (2)
shall not survive after expiry of the stipulated period and suspension
order in violation of Sub Rule (6) and (7) would not be sustainable. It is
also submitted that the initial suspension order dated 3.8.2023 be set
aside.
Ms.Ch.Sundari, learned Government Advocate submits
that State Respondent has not much role as it is between the petitioner
and respondent No.3.
Mr.Kaminikumar, learned counsel for respondent No.3
fairly admits that after expiry of suspension order there is no further
extension of the second extension order of suspension dated 2.2.2024.
This Court perused the materials on record and considered
the submissions made at the Bar and the relevant provisions of Rule 10
of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965. The first extension order dated
26.10.2023 is not valid in terms of sub Rule (6) and (7) of Rule 10 of
the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 and decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court
cited above. After expiry of the second extension order dated 2.2.2024,
there is no further extension of the suspension order.
Accordingly, the suspension order dated 3.8.2023 is set
aside. In the result the writ petition is allowed and disposed of.
Connected Misc case also stands disposed of.
JUDGE
Priyojit
RAJKUMAR Digitally signed by
RAJKUMAR PRIYOJIT
PRIYOJIT SINGH
Date: 2024.07.26
SINGH 12:51:09 +05'30'
