Deviprasad (In Wria 2469 Of 2022) vs State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 5421 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 5
 

 
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 305 of 2022
 

 
Appellant :- Deviprasad (In Wria 2469 Of 2022)
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Finance Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko. And Others
 
Counsel for Appellant :- Pawan Kumar Pandey
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Raj Kumar Upadhyaya (R.K.Upadhyaya)
 

 
Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.

Hon'ble Om Prakash Tripathi,J.

This appeal has been filed challenging the order dated 31.05.2022 passed by Writ Court by which the Court has refused to interfere in the order of suspension dated 25.04.2020 and has also not granted the prayer insofar as interference in the charge sheet, supplementary charge sheet and inquiry report which have also been sought by the petitioner.

This Court has perused the order impugned and has also heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and counsel appearing for the State-respondent and Sri R.K.Upadhyaya, counsel appearing for the opposite party no.3, the Public Service Commission.

It is apparent that the petitioner had approached this Court against the suspension order dated 25.04.2020 as well as the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner on various grounds. The Court had granted time to the Standing Counsel to seek instructions as to whether final order in pending disciplinary proceedings have been passed or not.

Learned Standing Counsel on the basis of instructions had submitted before the Writ Court that disciplinary proceeding have been concluded and the matter has been referred to the Public Service Commission for proposed punishment against the petitioner. Therefore, the Writ Court observed that since the inquiry proceedings have already been concluded, in case final order has been passed, the petitioner would have remedy against such order before the Competent Court and has, therefore not interfered in the suspension order, charge sheet and inquiry report with expectation that final orders pertaining to the disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner shall be passed expeditiously.

This Court finds that inquiry report has already been submitted to the Competent Court in the case of the petitioner, therefore, there is no chance for the petitioner in any way influencing the inquiry initiated against him, therefore, the question of continued suspension, also does not arrise.

The Supreme Court in State of Tamil Nadu vs. Promod Kumar IPS and another, (2018) 17 SCC 677 has referred to its judgment rendered in Ajay Kumar Choudhary v. Union of India, (2015) 7 SCC 291 to say that practice of protracted suspension should not be encouraged and suspension must necessarily be for a short duration and in case delinquent officer is not capable of exerting pressure and influencing witnesses or misusing of his office if he is reinstated, suspension order should not be extended indifinately.

Suspension order dated 25.04.2020 ought to be rescinded and the petitioner should be reinstated on the post in which he was working and the appropriate order be passed in this regard by the Competent Authority.

This Special Appeal is disposed of modifying the order dated 25.04.2020 passed by the Writ Court to the extent that Competent Authority should pass appropriate order for reinstatement of the petitioner and also to pass final order in the disciplinary proceedings initiated against him within a period of two months from the date a copy of this order is produced before it.

Order Date :- 27.6.2022

Monika