HC bins Jajpur college lecturer’s suspension over 48-hr custody | Bhubaneswar News
Cuttack: Orissa high court has quashed the suspension of a lecturer of a Jajpur-aided college, holding that his detention in judicial custody for more than 48 hours could not by itself justify continuation of the suspension without initiating disciplinary proceedings under the applicable service rules.Justice B P Routray said the suspension, “which on the face of it is for detention of the petitioner in judicial custody for more than 48 hours, cannot be permitted to stand”.The court passed the order on Aug 17 on a petition filed by Adwaita Prasad Mallik, principal-in-charge-cum-lecturer in Odia at Chitalo Degree Mahavidyalay in Jajpur. The web copy of the order was made available online on Friday.Considering the petition, Justice Routray set aside the Jan 7 suspension order and directed that Mallik be restored to service with immediate effect.Mallik was placed under suspension by the sub-collector-cum-president of the college’s governing body on Jan 7, 2026, after he was arrested in connection with Cuttack vigilance PS case no. 40 registered on Dec 31, 2025. The case relates to alleged offences under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and sections 409 and 120-B of the IPC.The court noted that Mallik remained in custody from Jan 2 to 9, 2026. The suspension order was issued on the premise that his detention had exceeded 48 hours.The court further pointed out that no charge of misconduct or statement of imputation had been prepared against Mallik under Chapter VI of the Odisha Education (Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Teachers and Members and Staff of Aided Educational Institutions) Rules, 1974.Justice Routray held that the Odisha Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1962 could not be applied to an employee of an aided educational institution when a specific mechanism was provided under the 1974 Rules.Moreover, while the suspension continued, it had not received approval from either the director of higher education or the secretary to the govt in the higher education department. The high court observed that the governing body president’s order had remained without such approval beyond 30 days.
