9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (9) TMI 63X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e report of investigating agency dated 09.03.2011 resulted in adhoc suspension of the CHA on 10.10.2011. There after, power under Regulation 20(2) was exercised to pass the order dated 24.01.2012 which was post decisional hearing order. The appellant in that case came to Tribunal against order dated 24.01.2012 with grievance of violation of the Regulations of CHALR 2004. Against order of dismissal of appeal by Tribunal, Hon'ble High Court held that both the orders i.e. order dated 10.10.2011 and 24.01.2012 were unsustainable being contrary the provisions to CHALR 2004 and those orders were set aside. The authority was allowed liberty to proceed with the enquiry and pass any order in accordance with law after granting opportunity to the appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 28.11.2013. 4. Counsel for the appellant says that the documents called for by the appellant was never supplied to him. The order dated 30.01.2013 no where discloses the date on which report was received by the authority to pass suspension order dated 30.01.2013. Appellant was kept in dark to know as to the time limit to be applied under Regulation 20 (2) of the CHALR 2004 to pass order dated 30.01.2013. 5. Today, on being informed by the Department that report was received on 01.01.2013 to pass the suspension order dated 30.01.2013, Appellant pleads that when no order was passed under Regulation 20 (2) of CHALR 2004 within 15 days of receipt of the report, there is violation of the said Regulation, since 15 days time is stipulated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ons of the parties before us. Concededly the Commissioner did not seek recourse to the power under Regulation 20(2). The immediacy or urgency of the situation was allowed to lapse and eventually the Commissioner issued the suspension order on 10.10.2011: even then, the power invoked was Regulation 20(1). This was later modified though a corrigendum. However, the fact remains that this power could not have been taken recourse to after the lapse of 15 days which is underlined by a 'non-obstante' clause in Regulation 20(2) and further underlined by the proviso to Regulation 22(1). The net result is that where immediate suspension is called for, the Commissioner has to take swift action and cannot wait; if he does so suspension can be m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
