Indianmandarins has reliably learnt that NaMo administration on August
17 denied extension in tenure to State Trading Corporation (STCIL) CMD Khaleel
Rahim who has been under suspension since 18 November 2016. It may be mentioned that Centre had, on 29 June 2018, moved Delhi High
Court against the order of a single-judge bench quashing the suspension of
Khalil against whom CBI had filed case for allegedly causing loss of approx Rs 2100
Crs to STCIL. The single-bench had mentioned that the prolonged suspension of Khalil
without deciding his representation for review of his suspension was ‘wholly
unjustified’. While rejecting Centre’s plea the single-bench had referred
Supreme Court’s previous order according to which ‘a suspension order should
not be extend beyond the period of 03 months and during this period, the
charge-sheet should not be served upon the delinquent officer. While challenging the single-judge bench order Centre had contended that
bench did not take into account CBI case filed against Rahim.
The Centre had further pleaded that Rahim’s representation could not be acted upon as
the STCIL (Conduct, Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1975 has no provision for
review of suspension.
Suspended Central PSU Chief denied extension
By IndianMandarins - 2018-08-17 13:47:20
Indianmandarins has reliably learnt that NaMo administration on August
17 denied extension in tenure to State Trading Corporation (STCIL) CMD Khaleel
Rahim who has been under suspension since 18 November 2016.
It may be mentioned that Centre had, on 29 June 2018, moved Delhi High Court against the order of a single-judge bench quashing the suspension of Khalil against whom CBI had filed case for allegedly causing loss of approx Rs 2100 Crs to STCIL.
The single-bench had mentioned that the prolonged suspension of Khalil without deciding his representation for review of his suspension was ‘wholly unjustified’. While rejecting Centre’s plea the single-bench had referred Supreme Court’s previous order according to which ‘a suspension order should not be extend beyond the period of 03 months and during this period, the charge-sheet should not be served upon the delinquent officer.
While challenging the single-judge bench order Centre had contended that bench did not take into account CBI case filed against Rahim.
The Centre had further pleaded that Rahim’s representation could not be acted upon as the STCIL (Conduct, Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1975 has no provision for review of suspension.
