Madhya Pradesh High Court
Babita Nagar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 16 October, 2023
Author: Anand Pathak
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANAND PATHAK
ON THE 16st OF OCTOBER, 2023
WRIT PETITION NO. 26619 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
BABITA NAGAR W/O SHRI MADHAV SINGH, AGED
ABOUT 51 YEARS, OCCUPATION: STAFF NURSE
(SUSPENDED) GOVERNMENT MATERNITY HOSPITAL
LAXMIGANJ GWALIOR R/O F-32, JAGJIVAN NAGAR,
60 FT. ROAD THATIPUR, GWALIOR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI ALOK KATARE - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND FAMILY
WELFARE, GOVT. OF M.P. MANTRALAYA, VALLABH
BHAWAN, BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. THE COMMISSIONER HEALTH SERVICES, BHOPAL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
3. THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR HEALTH SERVICES
GWALIOR (MADHYA PRADESH)
4. CHIEF MEDICAL AND HEALTH OFFICER, DISTRICT
GWALIOR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI M.S. JADON - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
1. The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is preferred
by the petitioner seeking following reliefs:
"(i) That, the present petition filed by the petitioner
may kindly be allowed.
(ii) That, the order dated 02-02-2022 Annexure P/1 be
set aside and the respondent be directed to revoke the
suspension and review the order of suspension as per the
Judgment of Ajay Kumar Chaudhary (Supra) and
petitioner be paid regular salary.
(iii) That, any other just, suitable and proper relief,
which this Hon'ble Court deems fit, may also kindly be
granted to the petitioner. Costs be also awarded in favour
of the petitioner."
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner who was
working as staff nurse was put under suspension by the respondents
vide order dated 02-02-2022 (Annexure P/1) on the basis of
registration of criminal case against her. It is further submitted that
despite lapse of almost one and half year, suspension order of
petitioner has not been revoked by the respondents and she has been
put under suspension for indefinite period.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner drew attention of this Court to the
order dated 17-04-2023 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court
in Writ Petition No.8510/2023 wherein in similar circumstances, by
relying the judgment of Apex Court in the case of Ajay Kumar
Choudhary Vs. Union of India through its Secretary and another,
(2015) 7 SCC 291, direction has been given to the respondents to
decide the case of petitioner in relation to revocation of suspension.
He seeks parity.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents/State opposed the submission
but fairly conceded that if any representation is preferred by the
petitioner then same shall be considered and decided by the
respondents in accordance with law.
5. Heard.
6. This is a case where petitioner has been continued to be remain under
suspension since February, 2022 on the ground of registration of
criminal case against her. From the fact situation, it also appears that
since last one and half year petitioner is under suspension. In terms of
rule 9(5)(c) & (d) of the M.P. Civil Services (Classification, Control
and Appeal) Rules, 1996 appointing authority/disciplinary authority
is obliged to pass the order for continuation/modification or
revocation of suspension order with reasons to be recorded. Said
spirit has been dealt with by the Apex Court in Ajay Kumar
Choudhary (supra).
7. It is pertinent to mention that General Administration Department,
State of Madhya Pradesh vide circulars dated 28-01-2013 and 30-09-
2015 has given certain guidelines in respect of periodical
consideration over suspension and same can be made. Said circular
indicates administrative intent wherein the respondents wanted
service of delinquent for the benefit of institution while placing him
for work rather than paying subsistence allowance/salary for
indefinite period.
8. In view of the above, looking to the statute, the judgment of Apex
Court in the case of Ajay Kumar Choudhary (supra) as well as the
circular, this petition is disposed of with the direction to the petitioner
to submit a detailed representation to the concerned authority within a
period of fifteen days and in turn the said authority shall consider and
decide the same by passing a reasoned order within a period of six
weeks from the date of receipt of representation. Outcome of the
representation so preferred by the petitioner be also intimated to her.
9. With the aforesaid direction, this petition stands disposed of.
(ANAND PATHAK)
Anil* JUDGE
ANIL
Digitally signed by ANIL KUMAR
CHAURASIYA
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA
PRADESH BENCH GWALIOR, ou=HIGH
KUMAR
COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH
GWALIOR, postalCode=474001,
st=Madhya Pradesh,
2.5.4.20=8512f40a1a9eaa50b6802d068b5
1dae27e84c266b09d283f0799e67cdc7df5
CHAURAS
0f,
pseudonym=F7E569EA2A8955818DF870B
0C50764B46C526E80,
serialNumber=EC534CBB3B245F050119F0
IYA
6F4A296DD83C765A1E2ACC6EC7D8BD8C
BCC9C2446E, cn=ANIL KUMAR
CHAURASIYA
Date: 2023.10.19 18:27:41 +05'30'
