Ku. Shashi Tandon v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 1259 of 2018 Ku. Shashi Tandon Daugher Of Shri Duje Ram Tandon, Aged About 30 Yearsm R/o Duldula, Police Station Duldula, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh., District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Public Health Department, Mahanadi Bhavan, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Director Public Health And Family Welfare Department, Indrawati Bhavan, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. Chief Medical And Health Officer, Jashpur District Jashpur Chhattisgarh., District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh

4. Collector Jashpur, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh., District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh

5. Block Medical Officer, Primary Health Centre, Dulduda, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh., District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh

6. Tahsildar, Duldula District Jashpur Chhattisgarh., District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh

7. The Station House Officer, Police Station Jashpur, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh., District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Aman Kesharwani, Advocate.

For State :

Mr. Ashish Surana, Panel Lawyer.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 08/02/18 1.

The petitioner is working on the post of Pharmacist Grade - II in Primary Health Centre, Duldula and she has been placed under suspension by order dated 18.05.2016 (Annexure - P/1) passed by respondent No. 3Chief Medical and Health Officer, Jashpur and till date her suspension order

has not been revoked, being aggrieved against which this writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner.

2.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the impugned order of suspension shall be revoked as charge-sheet has not been issued to the petitioner within a period of 45 days as per Rule 5(a) of the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966 and, therefore, the impugned order of suspension is unsustainable and bad in law.

3.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 4.

Be that as it may, the petitioner would be at liberty to file an application for revocation of her suspension before the respondent authorities who, in turn, shall consider and decide the petitioner's representation expeditiously within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The petitioner would also be at liberty to rely upon the decision of the Supreme Court on revocation of suspension, if any. 5.

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands finally disposed of. No order as to cost(s).

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Priyanka