WP(C) 89/2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B. K. SHARMA Heard Mr. G.P. Bhowmik, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Ms . R. Chakraborty, learned State Counsel. The petitioner, who is working as Senior Accountant in the Tinsukia Deve lopment Authority, is aggrieved by the Annexure-C letter dated 16.12.2008, by wh ich the Chairman of the Tinsukia Development Authority communicated the decision to place the petitioner under suspension in view of his involvement in Tinsukia PS Case No. 795/2008 under Section 302/201/34 IPC read with section 3/4 of Do wry Prohibition Act. Mr. Bhowmik, learned counsel for the petitioner submits tha t there is no progress in the criminal case and the petitioner has not even been charge sheeted. He further submits that merely because the petitioner has been shown involved in the said criminal case, the Authority, without considering as to whether continued suspension of the petitioner is the utmost necessity and to keep the petitioner under suspension indefinitely. On the other hand, Ms. R. Chakraborty, learned State Counsel, submits th at since the petitioner was behind the bars for more than 48 hours, it was incum bent on the part of the Authority to place him under suspension. She further sub mits that it will not be conducive in public interest to reinstate the petitione r in service, in view of his involvement in the said criminal case, which is of serious nature. While it is true that an incumbent may be placed under suspension upon i nvolvement in a criminal case and if he remains behind the bars for 48 hours. At the same time, the Authority may also consider as to whether the incumbent is r equired to be continued under suspension indefinitely. The petitioner’s represen tation/appeal dated 26.7.2010 and 4.9.2010 (Annexure-E and F) made to the Chairm an, Tinsukia Development Authority are still pending. Considering this the matter in its entirety, this writ petition is dispo sed of directing the Chairman, Tinsukia Development Authority to take on record the said two representations / appeals and dispose of the same, taking into acco unt all relevant consideration and also bearing in mind as to whether continued suspension of the petitioner is the utmost necessity. Let the representation/app eal be disposed of as expeditiously as possible, preferably within 28.2.2011. As regards the grievance of the petitioner regarding non-receipt of subs istence allowance as per admissible rate, the authority may also examine the sam e in accordance with rules. The petitioner may obtain a certified copy of this order and produce the same before the Chairman, Tinsukia Development Authority alongwith a copy of th e writ petition, necessary follow up action of the Chairman. Writ petition stands disposed of.