BHAIRAV DUTT SHARMA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -In the instant writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the impugned order of suspension dated 29.6.1995 passed by the Superintendent of Police, Pithoragarh, which has been admittedly served upon the petitioner in the month of September, 1995.

(2.) SRI Ashok Khare, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order of suspension dated 29.6.1995 which had taken effect in the month of September, 1995, cannot be said to have taken effect from the date of passing of the order, i.e. 29.6.1995, but from the date of service, i.e., from the date of its service in the month of September, 1995, when the petitioner was not under the administrative control of Senior Superintendent of Police, Pithoragarh.

(3.) BE that as it may. It is settled principle of law, in view of the decisions of Apex Court in the cases of Bachittar Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR 1963 SC 395 and State of Punjab v. Amar Singh Harika, AIR 1966 SC 1313, that an administrative order cannot be said to have taken effect unless it is served.