Bhuneshwar Prasad Verma v. The Steel Authority Of India Limited Through Its Chairman And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2798 of 2018 ====================================================== Bhuneshwar Prasad Verma S/o late Rameswar Prasad Verma Executive director Works, steel authority of India Limited , Rourkela Steel Plant Under suspension Presently Headquarter at Durgapur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The Steel Authority Of India Limited Through Its Chairman 2.

Chairman, Steel Authority of India Limited Corporate Office Ispat Bhawan, Lodi Road, New Delhi- 1100 3.

The Director personal, Steel Authority of India Limited Corporate Office Ispat Bhawan, Lodi Road, 4.

The Chief Executive Officer, Steel Authority of India Limited, Rourkela, Steel Plant, Orissa.

5.

The Deputy General Manager Personal, Steel Authority of India Limited Corporate Office Ispat Bhawan ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rajeev Kumar Singh, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Jayant Kumar Karn, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Date : 26-09-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Karn for Steel Authority of India.

The challenge raised is to a suspension order dated 10th January, 2017. This challenge raised before the Tribunal failed. Hence, this writ petition.

The contention raised is that the undue delay and

Patna High Court CWJC No.2798 of 2018 dt.26-09-2019 2/3 prolongment of the suspension order was unjustified and unreasonable. The Tribunal came to the conclusion that in the background of the case and keeping in view the Rules and Regulations applicable, it declined to interfere with the suspension order, but made an observation that it would be desirable for the respondent authorities to review the continuance or otherwise of the suspension order. During the period of the pendency of this writ petition, the respondent Steel Authority has filed a counter affidavit and Annexure-F thereto brings on record the communication of the General Manager dt. 10.7.2019 indicating that the suspension order had been reviewed by the competent authority. It was not found appropriate to revoke the suspension order.

The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the said suspension order does not contain any valid or cogent reason or even consideration of the undue prolonging of the suspension order and, therefore, the same should be interfered with.

We are of the considered opinion that the contention raised can be challenged before the Tribunal by impugning the order dated 10th July, 2019 and, therefore, the

Patna High Court CWJC No.2798 of 2018 dt.26-09-2019 3/3 petition is consigned to record, without prejudice to the rights of the petitioner to challenge the said order in accordance with law. (Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, CJ) ( Ashutosh Kumar, J) K.C.Jha/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date 30.09.2019 Transmission Date N/A