Petitioner challenged his indefinite suspension without charge-sheet. The High Court relied on Supreme Court precedent to direct respondents to decide on revocation within 30 days.
Directing respondents to pass an order on revocation of suspension within 30 days.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
WPS No. 1632 of 2020
---- Petitioner
Versus
---- Respondents
For Petitioner : Ms. Meena Shastri, Advocate For Respondents/State : Ms. Sunita Jain, GA
Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri
Order
02/11/2020
2
submitted that the suspension cannot be therefore, continued for the indefinite period in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Ajay
Kumar Choudhary Vs. Union of India through its Secretary and another {(2015) 7 SCC 291}.
21. We, therefore, direct that the currency of a Suspension Order should not extend beyond three months if within this period the Memorandum of Charges/Chargesheet is not served on the delinquent officer/employee; if the Memorandum of Charges/Chargesheet is served, a reasoned order must be passed for the extension of the suspension. As in the case in hand, the Government is free to transfer the person concerned to any Department in any of its offices within or outside the State so as to sever any local or personal contact that he may have and which he may misuse for obstructing the investigation against him. The Government may also prohibit him from contacting any person, or handling records and documents till the stage of his having to prepare his defence. We think this will adequately safeguard the universally recognized principle of human dignity and the right to a speedy trial and shall also preserve the interest of the Government in the prosecution. We recognize that the previous Constitution Benches have been reluctant to quash proceedings on the grounds of delay, and to set time - limits to their duration. However, the imposition of a limit on the period of suspension has not been discussed in prior case law, and would not be contrary to the interests of justice. Furthermore, the direction of the Central Vigilance Commission that pending a criminal investigation, departmental proceedings are to be held in abeyance stands superseded in view of the stand adopted by us.
3
SDSd/-/-
Goutam Bhaduri Judge
Ashu
2 issues framed by the court
Whether indefinite suspension of a government employee without service of charge-sheet violates Supreme Court precedent.
Whether the High Court should direct the government to decide on the suspension within a time limit.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Ajay Kumar Choudhary Vs. Union of IndiaRelied on¶22
(2015) 7 SCC 291 · Who else cites this
Alakhram Andilya
State Of Chhattisgarh
Goutam Bhaduri
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
