BRAJA KISHORE MOHARANA Vs. PRINCIPAL, RAVENSHAW COLLEGE, CUTTACK
HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
BRAJA KISHORE MOHARANA
PRINCIPAL, RAVENSHAW COLLEGE, CUTTACK
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) The only question that is raised in the writ application is that the suspension orders, annexure-1 dated 19-5-1971, and Annexure-2 dated 27-12-1971, passed by the Principal, Ravenshaw College (Opp. party), are without jurisdiction and as such nullities. In view of the narrow contention so raised, it is unnecessary to refer to the detailed facts narrated in the writ application and in the counter filed on behalf of the opp. party.
(2.) Admittedly, the petitioner Braja Kishore Moharana is a lower division clerk working in the Ravenshaw College Office. On 19th May, 1971, the Principal passed the order of suspension, Annexure-1. The relevant portion of this order is extracted hereunder:
Shri Braja Kishore Moharana, L. D. Clerk, office of the Ravenshaw College, Cuttack, is, in anticipation of sanction of the Governing Body, placed under suspension with effect from 1st May, 1971,
x x x x x"
The petitioner was allowed to join duties on 12-11-71. Thus, by virtue of the order, Annexure-1, the petitioner was placed under suspension from 19-5-71 to 11-11-71 (both days inclusive).
Again the opposite party passed the order of suspension, Annexure-2, on 27-12-71. The relevant portion of this order runs thus:
"In anticipation of the approval of the Governing Body, Sri Braja Kishore Moharana, a lower Division Clerk of this office who was earlier placed under suspension vide this office Order No. 2382 dated 19-5-71 and who was subsequently asked to rejoin his duty vide this office memo No. 7995 dated 12-11-71 pending final disposal of his case by the Governing Body is again placed under suspension with effect from 24-12-71.
X X X X x"
(3.) Mr. Patnaik in support of the writ application raised the following contentions:
(i) The Principal Ravenshaw College, is not the competent authority to suspend the petitioner; and (ii) A suspension order to take effect retrospectively is contrary to law.
Both the contentions shall prevail.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.