Paritosh K.Mukherjee - (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. Earlier, due to heart ailment, the petitioner absented from duty with effect from 22.12.1994 to 28.7.1995 when the Inspector General of Police, respondent No. 2 transferred the petitioner from District Pithoragarh to District Moradabad as Assistant Sub-Inspector. On the other hand, Sri K. M. Sahai, learned standing counsel submitted that the petitioner was transferred to Moradabad on his own seeking, as such the petitioner cannot make any advantage out of It.
(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. In view of the above, this court is of the opinion that the order of suspension, although passed on 29.6.1095, but has been served upon the petitioner in the month of September, 1995, shall take effect with effect from September, 1995 and not from the date of passing, i.e., dated 29.6.1995.;