Jai Prakash Singh Thakur vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2021 Latest Caselaw 245 Chatt

                                       1

                                                                        NAFR
             HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                       Writ Petition (S) No. 2121 of 2021

      Jai Prakash Singh Thakur S/o Shri Narayan Singh Thakur, Aged About
      56 Years, R/o Village And Post Pataud, Block Kanker, District Kanker
      (Chhattisgarh) 494334

                                                                ---- Petitioner

                                     Versus

   1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Women And Child
      Development      Department,     Mahanadi    Bhawan,     Nava    Raipur,
      (Chhattisgarh)

   2. The Collector Kondagaon, District Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh

   3. District Programme Officer, Women And Child Development, District
      Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh

                                                             ---- Respondents

For Petitioner : Mr. Pranjal Shukla, Advocate For State : Mr. Amrito Das, Addl. Advocate General

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 10.06.2021

1. The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is the

prolonged suspension in spite of the fact that the criminal case for

which the petitioner was placed under suspension stands concluded

wherein the petitioner has been acquitted.

2. According to the petitioner, the acquittal appeal preferred by the State

has also been rejected and the criminal proceeding thus has attained

finality. According to the petitioner, he was placed under suspension

on 29.08.2011 only on getting implicated in the FIR under the

provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The order of

suspension till date has not been revoked in spite of the fact that the

petitioner stands acquitted in the criminal case. Learned counsel for

the petitioner submits that there is also no disciplinary proceeding

initiated against the petitioner by the department on which count also

the petitioner could have been placed under suspension. Thus, the

petitioner is entitled for a suitable direction to be issued to the

respondents for reinstatement in service after revocation of suspension

and for all consequential benefits in the light of the acquittal.

3. Learned Additional Advocate General, however, submits that the fact

needs to be verified whether any disciplinary proceeding was initiated

or pending against the petitioner and also whether the petitioner still

continues under suspension in spite of the acquittal order in his favour

or not.

4. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, subject to verification of

the doubts raised by the Additional Advocate General, the writ petition

at this juncture in the larger interest of justice can be disposed of

directing the respondent no.3 to take a decision at the earliest

preferably within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of

this order deciding as to whether the suspension order issued in favour

of the petitioner is to be revoked in the light of the judgment of acquittal

which has been affirmed by an acquittal appeal preferred by the State.

5. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of.

Sd/-

P. Sam Koshy Judge Khatai