BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD. Vs. RAVI KANT MISHRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 30/7/2014 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur, Circuit Sitting at Gwalior in Original Application No. 165/2013. By the impugned order, the Tribunal has quashed the suspension order of the respondent dated 26/5/2011 and subsequent orders further continuing the suspension order.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners has submitted that impugned order is based upon misreading of the provisions as contained in Rule 30 (5) (b) of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL) Conduct, Discipline and Appeal Rules, 2006 (for short ''Rules of 2006 ''). For ready reference Rule 30 (5) (b) is quoted below: - ''Rule 30 .Suspension: - (5) (a) xxxx (b) The authority which made or deemed to have made the order of suspension shall review periodically whether continuance of suspension of the employee is justified or not. The first review shall be done at the end of three months from the date of suspension. Then further review can be done on six monthly basis. These are only guidelines and the disciplinary authority is fully competent to review the suspension whenever it is felt that continuance of suspension is not justified having regard to the circumstances of the case. ''

(3.) BY referring to the aforesaid Rule, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the authority competent has been empowered to review the suspension order periodically for further continuance of suspension of the employee. The first review shall be done at the end of three months from the date of suspension and thereafter, the further review can be done on 6 monthly basis. It is further submitted that aforesaid period of limitation is only regulatory in nature and disciplinary authority is fully competent to review the suspension order whenever it felt further continuance of the suspension of employee is not justified. Learned counsel submitted that because of serious financial irregularities committed by respondent, a departmental enquiry was ordered and respondent was suspended w.e.f. 15/2/2011 as per the recommendations of the Additional General Manager (Vigilance) vide letter dated 10/2/2011. Aforesaid recommendation and the order of suspension are placed on record as Annexure P/2 and P/3. Thereafter, on 13/5/2011 review committee of three senior officers of the department was constituted which reviewed the suspension order and recommended for further continuance thereof. Thereafter, the suspension order was further continued by review committee periodically after every six months. It is submitted that respondent/ employee has delayed the enquiry proceedings as he has not handed over the relevant documents. Besides CBI investigation is also going on against the respondent. Therefore, under such circumstances, suspension was reviewed periodically and continued. The last suspension order was dated 30/10/2013 for 6 months w.e.f. 31/10/2013.