VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Gauhati High Court 2023 › High Court of Gauhati

Sadhana Timungpi v. The State of Assam and 4 Ors

Disposed Of
Court
High Court of Gauhati
Decided
17 May 2023
Bench
Devashis Baruahauthor
Case no.
WP(C) 1946/2023

Judgment

ORDER Date : 17.05.2023

Heard Mr.P. Bordoloi, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Ms. S. Kemprai, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondent Nos.2, 3, 4 and 5 and Ms. M. Kalita, the learned counsel appears for the respondent No.1-Forest Department.

¶2The case of the petitioner herein is that the petitioner was put under suspension vide an order dated 21/12/2022 in pursuance to the KAAC Department of Environment and Forest letter dated 19/12/2022. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondent No. 3, who is also the disciplinary authority of the petitioner, till date has not issued the memorandum of charge/the Page No.# 3/4 chargesheet under the provisions of the Assam Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1964.

¶3The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner referring to the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Ajay Kumar Choudhary Vs. Union of India reported in (2015) 7 SCC 291 and further relying on paragraph No. 21 of the said judgment submitted that the currency of the suspension order should not exceed more than three months if the memorandum of charge/the chargesheet has not been served upon the delinquent employee.

¶4This Court while issuing notice on 4/4/2023 had directed the respondents to apprise this Court as to whether the memorandum of charge/the chargesheet has been served upon the petitioner as well as also to obtain instructions as to whether the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Ajay Kumar Choudhary(supra) has been followed.

¶5Today Ms. S. Kemprai, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.2, 3, 4 and 5 submitted that till date no departmental proceedings have been initiated as well as no memorandum of charge/the chargesheet has also been served upon the petitioner.

¶6Taking into account that the petitioner was suspended on 21/12/2022 and more than 148 days is over, but no memorandum of charge/the chargesheet has been served upon the petitioner, this Court holds that the further continuation of the suspension would be contrary to the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Ajay Kumar Choudhary(supra).

¶7Accordingly, this Court therefore directs the respondent No. 3 upon production of a certified copy of the instant order to forthwith reinstate the Page No.# 4/4 petitioner. This Court further taking into account the observations of the Supreme Court in paragraph No. 21 of the said judgment in the case of Ajay Kumar Choudhary(supra), grants the liberty to the respondent No. 3 to transfer the petitioner to any of its offices so that to sever any local or personal contact that the petitioner may have and which he may misuse for obstructing the investigation against him. The respondent No. 3 is further given the liberty to prohibit the petitioner from contacting any person or handling records and documents till the stage of his preparing his defence.

¶8This Court further taking into account the observations of the learned Division Bench of this Court in the case of State of Assam Vs. Ajit Sonowal & Others reported in (2023) SCC Online Gau 731, this Court further grants the liberty to the respondent authorities upon service of the memorandum of charge/the chargesheet to the petitioner and for reasons to be recorded, to exercise the power under Rule 6(1) of the Rules of 1964, if deemed necessary in public interest.

¶9The instructions so submitted by Ms. S. Kemprai, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.2, 3, 4 and 5 is kept on record and marked with the letter "X".

¶10The instant writ petition stands disposed off.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Case details

Parties and counsel

PageoNo.#o1/4 GAHC010073562023 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oWP(C)/1946/2023o SADHANAoTIMUNGPIo W/O-oLATEoDURNAoHANSE,o RESIDENToOFoRANGHANGo2,o WARDoNO.o7,o P.O.oANDoP.S.-oDIPHU,oPIN-782460,o DIST.-oKARBIoANGLONG,oASSAM. VERSUSo THEoSTATEoOFoASSAMoANDo4oORSo REPRESENTEDoBYoTHEoCOMMISSIONERoANDoSECRETARYoTOoTHEoGOVT.o OFoASSAM,o ENVIRONMENToANDoFORESToDEPARTMENT,o DISPUR,oGUWAHATI-06. 2:THEoSECRETARYoTOoTHEoENVIRONMENToANDoFORESToDEPARTMENT oKARBIoANGLONGoAUTONOMOUSoCOUNCIL oDIPHU oKARBIoANGLONG oASSAM o PIN-o782460. 3:THEoSPL.oPRINCIPALoCHIEFoCONSERVATORoOFoFORESTo(PCCF) oKARBIoANGLONGoAUTONOMOUSoCOUNCIL oKARBIoANGLONG oDIPHU oASSAM o PIN-o782460. 4:THEoDIVISIONALoFORESToOFFICER Page No.# 2/4 KARBI ANGLONG WEST DIVISION DIPHU KARBI ANGLONG ASSAM PIN- 782460. 5:THE RANGE FOREST OFFICER CENTRAL RANGE DIPHU KARBI ANGLONG WEST DIVISION DIPHU KARBI ANGLONG ASSAM PIN- 782460 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P BORDOLOI Advocate for the Respondent : SC, FOREST BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH

Source: High Court of Gauhati, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.