Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010144362025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/3988/2025 FARUQUE AHMED SON OF LATE ARAB ALI, R/O VILL- ATHAL BASTI, P.O.- GHUNGOOR, P.S.- SILCHAR, DIST- CACHAR, ASSAM-788014 VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS. TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, 124-C, SHASTRI BHAWAN, NEW DELHI- 110001 2:THE VICE CHANCELLOR ASSAM UNIVERSITY SILCHAR DARGAKONA SILCHAR ASSAM 788011 3:THE DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE VICE-CHANCELLOR ASSAM UNIVERSITY SILCHAR DARGAKONA SILCHAR ASSAM 788011 4:THE REGISTRAR ASSAM UNIVERSITY DARGAKONA SILCHAR ASSAM Page No.# 2/4 788011 5:THE DEAN DESHBANDHU CHITTARANJAN SCHOOL OF LEGAL STUDIES ASSAM UNIVERSITY DARGAKONA SILCHAR ASSAM 788011 6:THE HEAD DEPARTMENT OF LAW ASSAM UNIVERSITY DARGAKONA SILCHAR ASSAM 78801 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A R BHUYAN, MR N A MAZARBHUIYA,MR N Z CHOUDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., SC, ASSAM UNIVERSITY BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR ORDER Date : 10-12-2025 Heard Mr. A.R. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. The present writ petition has been instituted by the petitioner, assailing the order dated 01-02-2025 issued towards placing the petitioner under suspension. The challenge to the said order of suspension is on the ground that the petitioner has been kept under prolonged suspension without carrying out a review, the order of suspension, after completion the initial period for which such order remained valid. 3. Mr. A.R. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that no Page No.# 3/4 departmental proceedings has been instituted against the petitioner in the matter. He submits that in the criminal proceeding instituted against the petitioner charge-sheet has been filed by the police, upon completion of the investigation, on 27-08-2025. He, however, submits that the respondent university has not reviewed the order of suspension of the petitioner and accordingly, the same would not mandate any further extension after completion of the initial period of 90 (ninety) days. 4. Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 2 to 6, i.e. the authorities of the Assam University (AU) has fairly submitted that after placing the petitioner under suspension vide order dated 01-02-2025, the University authorities after completion of the initial period permissible for keeping an employee under suspension, i.e. for the period of 90 days, no review was carried out in the matter by the authorities. He submits that in view of the fact that no review has been carried out the initial order of suspension of the petitioner has lost its force. 5. In view of the submission of Mr. Keyal, learned standing counsel, AU, this Court is not called upon to further adjudicate the matter on its merit and it being admitted that completion of initial period of 90 (ninety) days from the date of issuance of suspension dated 01-02-2025 the same not being reviewed, the order of suspension has to be held to have lost its force. Accordingly, the respondent authorities are directed to reinstate the petitioner within a period of 10 days from today. 6. The period of suspension undergone by the petitioner shall be regularized after completion of the criminal proceeding instituted against the petitioner and presently pending before the learned Trial Court. Page No.# 4/4 In view of the above, the present writ petition stands closed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant