RAM MILAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mrs. R. Borah, counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S.C. Keyal, Asstt. SGI for the respondents.

(2.) By the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 3.9.2013 whereby the earlier suspension order dated 5.4.2013 has been continued.

(3.) Counsel for the petitioner at the outset has submitted that she is not pressing her other prayers and is pressing only the prayer with regard to the validity and legality of the extension of the petitioner's suspension order dated 5.4.2013 by the subsequent impugned order dated 3.9.2013. The petitioner's counsel submits that as per sub-rules (6) and (7) of Rule 10 of the CCS(CCA) Rules, 1965, there has to be a review of the suspension order prior to the expiry of 90 days from the date of the suspension order. She submits that in the present case, the petitioner was suspended on 5.4.2013 w.e.f. 20.3.2013. However, the suspension of the petitioner was continued for a further period of 180 days w.e.f 18.6.2013 to 14.12.2013. The relevant extract of the order dated 3.9.2013 is reproduced below: