Petition challenging suspension upon detention in police custody under Rule 10(2) of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965. The petitioner has since retired and the petition was disposed of as infructuous without adjudicating the challenge.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWPOA No. 7253 of 2020 Decided on: 10.05.2024
______________________________________________________________ Raj Kumar ....Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr. .…Respondents _ Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge. _______________________________________________________________ Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. Paresh Sharma and Mr. Rajiv Rai, Advocates. For the respondent : Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Ms. Sharmila Patial, Additional Advocates General and Mr. Raj Negi, Deputy Advocate General.
Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge (oral)
The instant petition has been filed for grant of the following substantive relief:-
“That the Hon’ble Tribunal may kindly be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned office order No. EDN-HE(25)B(15)-XVII-116/2019 dated 29th June, 2019 Vide Annexure A/1, whereby the applicant has been suspended w.e.f. date of his detention i.e. 25.06.2019 in terms of sub-rule (2) of Rule 10 of the Central Civil Services (Classification Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 by assigning the reason that the
1Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2
police custody of the applicant has exceeded 48 hours, which is factually incorrect.”
filed before the erstwhile Tribunal and no stay was granted. The petitioner was 55 years of age as on the date of filing of the petition, i.e. 10.07.2019, and by now stands retired.
Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed
of
( Tarlok Singh Chauhan ) Judge
( Sushil Kukreja )
10th May, 2024 Judge (raman)
1 issue framed by the court
Was the suspension of the petitioner under Rule 10(2) CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, following his detention in police custody, liable to be quashed?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Raj Kumar
State of H.P.
Tarlok Singh Chauhan
Sushil Kukreja
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
