Suspension under Regulation 10(1)(a) cannot exceed 270 days without a charge-sheet.

The applicant, Dean of ESIC Medical College, Faridabad, was suspended on 8 August 2025 under Regulation 10(1)(a) of the Employees’ State Insurance Corporation (Staff and Conditions of Service) Regulations, 2023.

The suspension was extended, and on 2 May 2026 the respondents ordered its continuation until further orders.

The applicant challenged that order, contending that the Regulations limited suspension without a charge-sheet to 270 days.

The charge-sheet was issued on 8 September 2026.

Whether the applicant’s suspension under Regulation 10(1)(a) could continue beyond 270 days in the absence of a charge-sheet.

Whether the respondents’ stated concern that the applicant might interfere with the investigation justified continuation of suspension beyond that period.

Regulation 10(1)(a) of the Employees’ State Insurance Corporation (Staff and Conditions of Service) Regulations, 2023 authorises suspension where disciplinary proceedings are contemplated or pending.

Regulation 10(6) provides for periodic review and limits each extension to a period not exceeding 180 days.

Under the second proviso to Regulation 10(7), where no charge-sheet has been issued in a case under Regulation 10(1)(a), the total period of suspension, including extensions, cannot exceed 270 days from the date of the suspension order.

The Tribunal also considered Rakesh Kumar Garg v. Union of India & Ors., W.P.(C) No. 7071/2019, but found it did not address the specific regulatory scheme applicable here.

The applicant’s suspension was expressly made under Regulation 10(1)(a), and no charge-sheet had been issued by the time the 270-day period expired.

Applying the second proviso to Regulation 10(7), the Tribunal held that the respondents could not continue the suspension beyond that statutory limit.

The respondents’ concerns about possible interference with the investigation could not override the Regulations’ express restriction.

Rakesh Kumar Garg did not alter that conclusion because it did not concern the specific scheme in Regulation 10.

It quashed the continuation of suspension beyond 270 days from the initial suspension order and directed the respondents to reinstate the applicant from the day immediately following expiry of that period, with consequential benefits in accordance with law.

Pending miscellaneous applications were disposed of, with no order as to costs.