RAMA SHANKAR Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel.

(2.) The petitioner is a Junior Assistant with the respondent - NOIDA. He was taken into custody on account of being involved in a criminal case and was put behind bars. The petitioner moved an application before the authority for revoking the suspension order after his release from detention. Having failed to get any relief, he has filed this writ petition for quashing of the suspension order dated 20.8.2007 on the ground that the Service Regulations 1981 clearly mandate the authorities to pass appropriate orders in such a situation.

(3.) Sri Anil Kumar Bajpai, learned Counsel for the petitioner, has relied on the decision of this Court in the case of Radhey Shyam v. The Chairman, NOIDA and Anr. Writ Petition No. 17132 of 2002, decided on 25.4.2002 and the subsequent decision in relation to the same employee in Writ Petition No. 42220 of 2002, decided on 30.9.2002. Sri Bajpai, on the strength of the said decisions, contends that the respondent - authority has to consider the representation of the petitioner, apply its mind and pass a reasoned order for either accepting or rejecting the request of the petitioner. He submits that even though under the Regulations, the petitioner will be deemed to have been suspended, yet the respondents still continue to enjoy the power to revoke the same and which power has to be exercised in accordance with the Regulations aforesaid.