Chattisgarh High Court
Suresh Toppo vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 4 April, 2022
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Writ Petition (S) No. 2274 of 2022
3. Suresh Toppo S/o Late Barnabas Toppo, Aged About 42 Years
Occupation Service, Accountant, Government District Hospital -
Jashpur, District - Jashpur, Chhattisgarh.
2. Hari Prasad Dansena S/o Shri Dugru Ram Dansena, Aged About 48
Years, Occupation Service, Assistant Grade III, Government District
Hospital - Jashpur, District - Jashpur Chhattisgarh.
3. Tej Pratap Chauhan S/o Shri Chandan Singh Chauhan, Aged About
35 Years, Occupation Service, Pharmacist Grade -II, Government
District Hospital - Jashpur, District - Jashpur, Chhattisgarh.
4. Swadhin Charan Sahu S/o Shri Bharat Chandra Sahu, Aged About 43
Years, Occupation Service, Pharmacist Grade -II, Government
District Hospital - Jashpur, District - Jashpur, Chhattisgarh.
---- Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Health
And Family Welfare, New Mantralaya, Mahanadi, Bhawan, New
Raipur Chhattisgarh.
2. The Director, Department Of Health And Family Welfare, Raipur
Chhattisgarh.
3. The Collector, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh.
4. The Chief Medical And Health Officer, Department Of Health And
Family Welfare, Jashpur, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh.
5. The Civil Surgeon Cum Chief Hospital Superintendent, Government
District Hospital - Jashpur, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondents
For Petitioners : Mr. A. N. Bhakta, Advocate
For State : Mr. Ravi Bhagat, Dy. Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy
Order On Board
04.04.2022
1. The four petitioners before this Court are aggrieved by the prolonged
suspension. All the petitioners were suspended vide order dated
04.08.2021 by the District Collector, Jashpur i.e. respondent no.3.
2. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that the petitioners were also
subjected to disciplinary proceedings and in the enquiry there has
been nothing adverse against the petitioners. He submits that the
enquiry report also has been perhaps in favour of petitioners but the
authorities have till date not taken a final decision on the enquiry
report. The further contention of petitioners is that it is more than 7
months that the petitioners have continued in suspension and in
terms of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme court in the case of
Ajay Kumar Choudhary v. Union of India through its Secretary
and Anr. reported in (2015) 7 SCC 291 the respondents are
incumbent to reconsider beyond a period of 90 days deciding as to
whether there was any further need for continuation of suspension
and whether the services of petitioners have to be taken back in
service or not.
3. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that the respondents 4 & 5
have already made certain recommendations to the respondent no.3
calling for immediate revocation of suspension considering the work
pressure that the respondents 4 & 5 are facing on the administrative
side.
4. Given the entire facts and circumstances of the case, let the
respondent no.3 take an appropriate decision so far as the order of
suspension of the four petitioners are concerned both keeping in view
the finding given by the Enquiry Officer as also taking into
consideration the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case
of Ajay Kumar Choudhary (supra). Let an appropriate decision be
taken by the respondent no.3 within a outer limit of 45 days from the
date of receipt of copy of this order.
5. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of.
Sd/-
(P. Sam Koshy)
Judge
Khatai
