I.D. Khalkho vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2021 Latest Caselaw 2088 Chatt

                                       -1-


                                                                              NAFR
             HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

                             WPS No. 4565 of 2021

     I.D. Khalkho S/o Late Nirdhosh Khalkho Aged About 55 Years R/o Ward

     No.11, Patpariya Colony, Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh

                                                                    ---- Petitioner

                                     Versus

  1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, School Education

     Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur,

     District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

  2. Under Secretary State Of Chhattisgarh, School Education Department,

     Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur,

     Chhattisgarh

  3. Joint Director Public Education, Division Surguja, Ambikapur, District

     Surguja, Chhattisgarh

  4. District Education Officer District Jashpur, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh

                                                                ---- Respondents

For Petitioner : Mr. Vivek Singhal, Advocate.

     For State                   :      Mr. Jitendra Pali, Dy. AG

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

01/09/2021

1. Present writ petition has been preferred only on account of prolonged

suspension of the petitioner.

2. The petitioner in the present writ petition was working on the post of

Principal, Government Boys Higher Secondary School, Bagicha, District

Jashpur. The services of the petitioner was placed under suspension vide

order dated 01.06.2020. Subsequent to the petitioner being placed under

suspension, he was served upon with a charge sheet on 16.07.2020.

Subsequently, there has been no further development on the disciplinary

front on the charge sheet that was issued on 16.07.2020. According to the

petitioner it is now more than 14 months that petitioner stands under

suspension. According to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in

the case of "Ajay Kumar Choudhary v. Union of India, through its

Secretary & Another" (2015) 7 SCC 291, all the Disciplinary

Authorities are required to reconsider the order of suspension in every

case where the order of suspension exceeds beyond a period of 90 days.

3. In the instant case, for a period of well over one year the petitioner's

disciplinary proceedings had not progressed except for the issuance of the

charge sheet.

4. Given the said facts and circumstances of the case, particulary, taking

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

Kumar Choudhary(Supra) the present writ petition as of now stands

disposed of directing the respondent no.1 to reconsider the case of the

petitioner so far as whether the order of suspension needs to be continued

or whether it would be more in the interest of the department if the order of

suspension is revoked pending the disciplinary proceedings initiated

against the petitioner. It does not mean that order of suspension has to be

revoked after 90 days, all that the Hon'ble Supreme Court meant was

beyond a period of 90 days the Disciplinary Authorities have to reconsider

the issue of suspension and decide whether it has to be further continued

or not? While deciding, the gravity of the charges leveled against the

petitioner, has to be assessed and also see what would be the impact if

the petitioner is permitted to resume his services.

5. Let an appropriate decision be taken by the respondent no.1 in this regard

within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

6. With the aforesaid observations, the present writ petition stands disposed

off.

Sd/-

(P. Sam Koshy) Judge Rohit