Chattisgarh High Court
Jitendra Kumar Prasad vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 26 August, 2022
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Order Sheet
WPS No. 228 of 2022
Jitendra Kumar Prasad Versus State Of Chhattisgarh
7-
26-8-2022
Mr. Y.C. Sharma, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Vivek Sharma, Mr.
Ajeet Kumar Yadav and Mr. Ajay Chandra, counsel for the petitioner.
Mrs. Sunita Jain, GA for the State.
Heard on I.A,.No. 2 of 2022, which is an application for
amendment in the petition.
On due consideration, the application is allowed and necessary
amendment be carried out in the writ petition within a week.
Also heard on I.A.No.3 of 2022, which is an application for grant
of stay the subsequent suspension order dated 20-1-2022.
Learned State counsel would submit that the suspension order
has been passed on 20-1-2022 which is appealable order, as such
present writ petition assailing through this amendment subsequent
application is not maintainable and deserves to be rejected. She
would further submit that suspension is an appealable order as per
Rule 9(2) of the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Classification Control &
Appeal) Rules 1966, therefore, the writ petition without exhausting
alternative remedy, is not maintainable. She would further submit that
charge sheet has been issued, therefore, continuation of the petitioner
from 18-8-2021 is legally justified and does not warrant any
interference.
Per contra, learned State counsel would draw attention of this
court to the judgment of Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal
No.215 of 2022 (Ritu Surange vs. State of Chhattisgarh and others)
decided on 16-6-2022 wherein Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court
has held in para 23 as under:
"23. The second order of suspension was
passed after about 2 months of resumption of
duty by the appellant after revocation of the
first suspension order dated 04-09-2021.
The learned Single Judge had observed that
the nature of charges are grave, but that is
not how the competent authority has
proceeded in the matter. It was for the
authority to decide whether having regard to
the nature of charges, suspension of the
officer is warranted. The order reflects total
non-application of mind and the order of
suspension has been passed in a routine and
mechanical manner on a fallacious
assumption that suspension order should
invariably follow once a charge sheet is
issued".
The facts of the aforesaid case are slightly different from the
facts of the present case as the suspension of the petitioner has not
been revoked by the State, but he has been placed under suspension
since 18-8-2021 and charge -sheet has been issued to the petitioner.
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ajay Kumar Choudhary vs.
Union of India through its Secretary and another, reported in
(2015) 7 SCC 291 has deprecated the stand of the Government to
keep the Government servant under suspension for such a long
period and if the Government intends to keep any Government
servant on suspension, it shall assign the reason .
Let the State file an additional affidavit indicating what is the
object keeping the petitioner for remaining on suspension for more
than one year though charge-sheet has been issued and whether
there is any purpose to keep him on suspension where services of
the petitioner can be utilized by the State, on the next date of hearing.
List this case on 29-9-2022.
Sd/-
(Narendra Kumar Vyas)
Judge
Raju
