SAROOJ KUMAR PAUL Vs. STATE OF WEST BENAGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant is an Execution Clerk to the Court of the learned Civil judge, Junior Division at Jhargram, District Midnapore (West ). A criminal case under section 498a/320/34 of the Indian Penal Code has been registered against the elder brother of the appellant. Allegations are also made against the appellant. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, appellant was arrested when he was returning home after office on 2nd January, 2007. He remained in custody till he was released on bail by order dated 29th January, 2007. On February 2, 2007 when the petitioner reported for duty a show-cause notice was served upon him asking him to show-cause as to why appropriate steps shall not be taken against him for unauthorized absence from duty since January 3, 2007. The petitioner submitted the reply to the show-cause notice and stated that he did not attend the duty as he was in custody. Since his absence from duty was unintentional and due to unavoidable circumstances, he prayed for grant of leave and permission to join duty. At that stage, the competent authority issued the order dated 6th of February, 2007 directing that the appellant shall be placed under deemed suspension with effect from 3rd January, 2007 in terms of provision contained in Rule 7 (3) of the West Bengal Services (Classification, Control and Appeal)Rules, 1971. This order was challenged by the appellant in the writ petition which has been dismissed by the learned Single Judge by order dated 8. 10. 07. Hence, the present appeal.

(2.) WE have heard the learned Counsel for the parties at length.

(3.) THE learned Single Judge has come to the conclusion that the order of suspension under Rule 7 (3) is not bad in law as it is supported by the statutory provision. The appellant has been placed under deemed suspension as he remained in custody for more than 48 hours. It has also been observed that there is no question of breach of natural justice in case the authorities had failed to take into consideration that the involvement of the appellant in the criminal case was not with reference to discharge of any official function. It is also observed that an employee is deemed to be suspended under Rule 7 (3) when he is detained in Police/judicial custody for more than 48 hours. In coming to the aforesaid conclusion the learned Single Judge has relied on a judgment of the Supreme Jourt in the case of Union of India vs. Rajiv kumar, 2003 (6) SCC 516 and judgment of this Court in the case of Mihir kumar Das vs. State of West Bengal and Ors. , 84 CWN 339.