is open for the Review Committee constituted for the purpose of recommending for extension of the period of suspension to review the matter and on the basis of the such recommendation the competent authority can modify the order of suspension. It is pleaded in the writ petition that after making such review the Review Committee recommended for continuation of suspension of the respondent herein for further 180 days w.e.f. 1.5.2012. It is stated that the proceedings of the Permanent Review Committee have been communicated to the General Manager, Ordnance Factory by proceedings dated 2.5.2012. However, the counter-affidavit filed before the Tribunal on behalf of the Ordnance Factory on 18.6.2012 was silent about the said recommendation stated to have been made by the Permanent Review Committee for extension of period of suspension. At any rate, even as of today, no order appears to have been passed by the competent authority extending the suspension in terms of the recommendation of the Permanent Review Committee. Therefore, the contention on behalf of the writ petitioners that the suspension was extended after review before the expiry of 90 days w.e.f. 1.2.2012 cannot be accepted. Consequently the impugned order of suspension dated 16.3.2012 stood lapsed.
