Ankita Singh vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2021 Latest Caselaw 1169 Chatt

                                       -1-

                                                                                NAFR
             HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

                           WPS No. 3638 of 2021
  1. Ankita Singh D/o Shri L.S. Kanwar Aged About 36 Years Posted As Siksha
     Karmi, Grade III, Primary School Pasid, Block Bilha, District - Bilaspur
                                                                    ---- Petitioner
                                     Versus
  1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of School
     Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur Atal Nagar, District Raipur,
     Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh
  2. District Education Officer Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.
  3. Chief Executive Officer Janpad, Bilha, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.
  4. Block Education Officer Bilha, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.
                                                       ---- Respondents

For Petitioner : Shri Harshmander Rastogi, Advocate. For State : Shri Suyash Dhar, Panel Lawyer.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board

15/07/2021

1. The petitioner in the present writ petition is aggrieved of the inaction

on the part of the respondents in not reconsidering the claim of the

petitioner for being taken back in service after revocation of the

suspension.

2. The brief facts necessary for disposal of this case are that the

petitioner was working as a Shiksha Karmi-III under the respondents.

For an alleged Act of unauthorized absence for a considerable

period of time, the service of the petitioner was placed under

suspension vide the order dated 29.02.2016 in-spite of more than 5

years having been passed, the petitioner remains to continue under

suspension.

3. According to the Counsel for the petitioner, in between, the

respondents had revoked the order of suspension vide order dated

08.03.2019, however the said order has been cancelled in March

2019 itself, thereafter, the petitioner remains under suspension.

4. It is the contention of the petitioner that in-spite of more than five

years having been passed, the petitioner till date has not been

served with any charge-sheet and for this reason also, the petitioner

needs to be taken back in service.

5. It is the further contention of the petitioner that in the light of the

judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ajay Kumar

Choudhary v. Union of India (2015) 7 SSC 291), the authorities are

required to reconsider the issue whether the petitioners suspension

needs revocation or not.

6. Given the entire facts and circumstances of the case, particularly

taking note of the judgment given by the Supreme Court in the case

of Ajay Kumar Choudhary (Supra), the present writ petition is at this

juncture disposed of directing the Respondent No. 3 to immediately

reconsider the aspect as to whether the petitioner's suspension

needs to be revoked or not, keeping in view the fact that though

more than five years have lapsed, he has not been served with a

charge-sheet.

7. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of.

Sd/-

(P. Sam Koshy) Judge Jyotijha