RAJIV KUMAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Interpretation of Rule 10(2) of the (in short "CCS (CCA) Rules is in-question in this writ petition, which arises out of a judgment and order dated 14th March 2001 and 15th May 2001 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in O.A. No. 1539/00 and RA No. 187/01 respectively.

(2.) The petitioner was recruited as a Member of the Indian Revenue Services.While posted as Assistant Commissioner a tax defaulter in relation to an order of attachment of his Bank Accounts. An allegation was made that the petitioner had sought for illegal gratification, wherefor, the Central Bureau of Investigation (in short 'CBF) purported to have organised a trap on 25/26th March 1998. The petitioner contends that he wasmanhandled andallegedly currency notes were recovered three corridors away from his cabin. However, he had been taken in police custody from 26th March 1998 to 2nd April 1998. He was granted bail on 2nd April 1998.

(3.) By an order dated 15th May 1998 the petitioner was placed under suspension purported to be in terms of Rule 10(2) of the CCS(CCA) Rules, 1965 which reads thus:-