<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2017 (9) TMI 2005 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308805</link>
    <description>Continued suspension of a government servant does not automatically lapse merely because a charge-sheet is not served within ninety days; automatic cessation is confined to the limited situation in Rule 10(7), while Rule 10(5)(a) allows suspension to continue until modified or revoked by the competent authority. The Tribunal was not entitled to substitute its own decision for the administration&#039;s once the charge-sheet had been issued; at most, it could require a reasoned justification for continuation of suspension, subject to judicial review. The order revoking suspension was therefore unsustainable, and the authority was left free to continue or extend suspension under Rule 10, with reasons to be recorded and subsistence allowance paid in accordance with the rules.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 13 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 24 Jul 2023 21:19:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=720363" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (9) TMI 2005 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308805</link>
      <description>Continued suspension of a government servant does not automatically lapse merely because a charge-sheet is not served within ninety days; automatic cessation is confined to the limited situation in Rule 10(7), while Rule 10(5)(a) allows suspension to continue until modified or revoked by the competent authority. The Tribunal was not entitled to substitute its own decision for the administration&#039;s once the charge-sheet had been issued; at most, it could require a reasoned justification for continuation of suspension, subject to judicial review. The order revoking suspension was therefore unsustainable, and the authority was left free to continue or extend suspension under Rule 10, with reasons to be recorded and subsistence allowance paid in accordance with the rules.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308805</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>