Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 218 (GAU)

MUKUL SUT v. STATE OF ASSAM

2018-02-05

ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA

body2018
JUDGMENT & ORDER : 1. Heard Mr. N. Borah, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.SMT Chisti, learned Standing Counsel for the Elementary Education Department as well as Ms. D Das Barman, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate appearing for the respondent No.6. 2. The petitioner was initially serving as an Assistant Teacher in Hizim ME Madrassa, North Karimganj. Thereafter, he was transferred as an Assistant Teacher and posted at Patrichuk Mornoi Chapori ME School, Lakhimpur. The petitioner is aggrieved by an order dated 22.06.2017, by which he was placed under suspension. 3. The order of 22.06.2017 indicates that pending drawal of departmental proceeding and on the basis of a report received from the Officer In Charge of Ghilamara Police Station as regards the arrest of the petitioner in connection with Ghilamara PS Case No.69/2017 u/s 341/294/506/307/323 of IPC and as per instruction of the Additional Deputy Commissioner and In-charge Sub Divisional Officer (C) Dhakuakhana, the petitioner was placed under suspension. 4. Mr. Borah, learned counsel for the petitioner by referring to the proviso to Rule-6 (2) of the Assam Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1964, submits that when a detention is made on account of any charge not connected with his position as a Government servant or continuance in office is not likely to embarrass the Government or the Government servant in the discharge of his duties or the charge does not involve moral turpitude, the appointing authority may vacate the suspension order when the concerned person is released on bail or is not otherwise in custody or imprisonment. 5. It is stated that in the instant case, the petitioner had been released on bail on 04.07.2017. On being released on bail, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 13.07.2017 before the Director of Elementary Education, Assam as well as the District Elementary Education Officer, Nalbari that by virtue of the provision of the proviso to Rule- 6 (2) to the Assam Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1964, the appointing authority may withdraw the order of suspension. It is stated that although such representation had been submitted, but the same had not been given its consideration by the concerned authority. 6. It is stated that although such representation had been submitted, but the same had not been given its consideration by the concerned authority. 6. As the proviso to Rule-6 (2) provides the authorities a discretion to withdraw the suspension, therefore in order to invoke the discretion, the incumbent has the right to make a representation against an order of suspension upon being released from custody and accordingly, it is incumbent upon the concerned authority to give a due consideration to such a representation. 7. In view of the above, as agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties including that of the respondents, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the Director of Elementary Education, Assam to give a due consideration to the representation of the petitioner dated 13.07.2017 by taking into consideration the provisions of the proviso to Rule-6 (2) of the Assam Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1964, and pass a reasoned order thereon. 8. The aforesaid exercise be carried out within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 9. In terms of the above, the writ petition stands disposed of.