Devnath Jagat vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 2781 Chatt

                                             1

                                                                            NAFR
             HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                           WPS No. 3030 of 2022

   1. Devnath Jagat S/o Mahadev Jagat Aged About 46 Years Address - Village
      Baridih Tehsil - Kota District Bilaspur, (C.G.)

                                                                    ---- Petitioner

                                       Versus

   1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary Department Of Panchayat And
      Rural Development Mantralaya, Mahandi, Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District
      Raipur (C.G.)

   2. Panchayat And Social Welfare Department Through Its Joint Secretary
      District Office Panchayat And Social Welfare Department, Bilaspur (C.G.)

   3. Collector, District Bilaspur (C.G.)

                                                        ---- Respondents

For Petitioner : Ms. Diksha Gouraha, Advocate.

For State                         :         Mr. Ravi Bhagat, Dy. G.A.


                      Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy
                                 Order On Board
27.04.2022

1. The relief sought for by the petitioner, is for an appropriate direction to

the respondents to take an appropriate decision so far as suspension

of the petitioner is concerned.

2. Perusal of the record would reflect that the services of the petitioner

were placed under suspension vide order dated 11.01.2008. The

services of the petitioner were placed under suspension on account of

the petitioner getting implicated in a criminal case for the offence

punishable under Section 409 and 34 of IPC in a Crime No. 35 of 2009

registered at Police Station, Ratanpur District Bilaspur. The Trial has

finally culminated in acquittal of the petitioner. The judgment of the Trial

Court was dated 30.11.2018.

3. According to the counsel for the petitioner, though there is an order of

acquittal in his favour, the respondents till date have neither revoked

the order of suspension nor are they permitting the petitioner to resume

his duties.

4. It is the further contention of the counsel for the petitioner that the

respondents have also not initiated any disciplinary proceeding against

the petitioner under the service rules and regulations governing the

field.

5. Given the aforesaid submission by the counsel for petitioner, subject to

verification of facts, the respondents no. 1 & 2 are directed to

immediately process the claim of the petitioner so far as the revocation

of the order of suspension is concerned, in light of the judgment of

acquittal dated 30.11.2018. Let an appropriate decision be taken within

an outer limit of 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

6. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of.

Sd/-

P. Sam Koshy Judge Jyoti