AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
2 paragraphs · 202 wordsR.N. Prasad, J.—The petitioner has approached this Court for quashing the order of suspension dated 23.10.1999. Learned Counsel for the petitioner States that during the pendency of the writ petition the suspension order has been revoked vide letter dared 30th of January 2000, Annexure-11. He however, says that in Annexure-11 it has been stated that ''Nilamban Awadhi ka wetan deai nahin hoga''.
No counter affidavit has been filed in this case. However, it is evident from Annexure-11 that while revoking the suspension of the petitioner the authority has committed error in passing the order that salary during the period of suspension will not be paid to the petitioner. It is well established rule of law that such order can be passed only after conclusion of the proceeding. Therefore, the order to the aforesaid effect cannot be held to be legal and accordingly it is quashed. The proceeding initiated against the petitioner will proceed. However, since the suspension of the petitioner has been revoked, he shall be entitled to his salary during the period of suspension. Accordingly, the respondents/ authority concerned are directed to pay the salary to the petitioner for the period of suspension. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.