2011 (8) TMI 1003

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd a period of 90 days of its issuance as the petitioners had breached the service rules applicable to the respondent. 2. The respondent was appointed in the Central Excise Department on 15-6-1984. While holding the post of Superintendent (Preventive), Central Excise, Thane II, the respondent was detained in custody by the Central Bureau of Investigation from 23-9-2004 to 6-10-2004. An order was issued by the petitioners on 29-9-2004 indicating that the respondent was deemed to be under suspension in view of Rule 10(2) of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965. It appears that this order of suspension was continued beyond a period of ninety days without obtaining the recommendations of the review c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... on suspension was illegal and in breach of the service Rules, concluded the Tribunal. 5. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners has argued before us that the Tribunal has erred in its calculations of the number of days after the suspension order was issued to the respondent during which time the order was reviewed within the period stipulated in the service Rules. He submitted before us that the date of the suspension order must be reckoned from the date on which it was issued to the delinquent employee and not from any previous date. The learned Counsel has drawn our attention to the service Rules which were in operation when the respondent was suspended and the amended Rules. The service rules were amended in 2007. 6.&e....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the extended period of suspension. Extension of suspension shall not be for a period exceeding one hundred and eighty days at a time. (7)     Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-rule (5)(a), an order of suspension made or deemed to have been made under sub-rule (1) or (2) of this rule shall not be valid after a period of ninety days unless it is extended after review, for a further period before the expiry of ninety days. 1. The amended Rules which came into effect from 6-6-2007 provide that in sub-rule (6), the words "before expiry of ninety days from the date of the order of suspension" have been substituted by the words "before expiry of ninety days from the effective date of suspension" Sub-rule (7) has ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... no dispute that the respondent was deemed to have been placed under suspension immediately he was detained in custody by the Central Bureau of Investigation on 23-9-2004. In view of the provisions of Rule 10(2), this was the effective date of suspension. Although the order was issued by the petitioners only on 29-9-2004, placing the respondent under suspension, the date to be reckoned as the deemed date of suspension for the purposes of Rule 10 is 23-9-2004 as rightly held by the Central Administrative Tribunal. Sub-rule (2) of Rule 10 is unambiguous inasmuch as it provides that a Government servant shall be deemed to have been placed under suspension by the appointing authority with effect from the date of his detention in custody on a cr....