Mohan Lal Sahu v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No.1389 of 2018 Mohan Lal Sahu S/o S/o Shri Jai Sahu, Aged About 48 Years R/o Village And Post Sankara, Tahsil Pithora, Police Station Sankara, District Mahasamund (Chhattisgarh), District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Home/ Police, Mahanadi Mantralaya, Police Station And Post Rakhi, New Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh), District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Director General Of Police (D.G.P.) Police Hedquarters (P.Hq.) Near Mahanadi Mantralaya, P.S. And Post Rakhi, New Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh), District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. Inspector General Of Police (I.G.P.) Office Of Inspector General Of Police, Shankar Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh), District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

4. Senior Superintendent Of Police (S.P.) Office Of Superintendent Of Police (S.P.), Mahasamund, District Mahasamund (Chhattisgarh), District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Abhishek Pandey, Advocate For State : Mr. Avinash Singh, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 12/02/2018 (1) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that respondent No.4 has suspended the petitioner from his service on 03.10.2017 and charge-sheet has not been issued within 45 days from the date of his suspension, which is unsustainable and bad in law, against which this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed.

(2) Be that as it may, the petitioner is at liberty to make representation before the competent authority for reinstate within a period of ten days from today. If such representation is filed by the petitioner before the competent authority, in that event the competent authority shall consider and decide the representation in accordance with law expeditiously within a period of two weeks from the date of filing of such representation. (3) It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the competent authority would be at liberty to decide the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law.

(4) With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands finally disposed of. No order as to costs.

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge L/-