Deepak Kumar Yadav v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 3025 of 2021

1. Deepak Kumar Yadav S/o Late Hiralal Yadav Aged About 28 Years R/o Cannal City, Ward No. 18, Near Shiv Temple, Janjgir, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Livestock Development Department , Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. Director Chhatitsgarh State Veterinary Services, Indrawati Bhawan, 3rd Floor, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3. Additional Director Chhattisgarh State Veterinary Services , District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

4. Deputy Director Chhattisgarh State Veterinary Services, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh.

5. Collector District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh. ----Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Ashutosh Trivedi, Advocate.

For State :

Ms. Binu Sharma, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 29.06.2021

1. The present writ petition has been filed seeking for a relief of an appropriate direction to the respondents to consider whether the suspension of the petitioner needs to be continued or not.

2. According to the counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner has been placed under suspension on 10.09.2020 as such he has remained under suspension for a period of more than nine months. Relying upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Case of Ajay Choudhary v. Union of India and Anr. 2015 7 SCC 291, the present writ

petition has been filed for an appropriate direction to the respondents to reconsider whether the suspension needs to be revoked or not.

3. In view of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ajay Choudhary (supra), the present writ petition in its present form is disposed of directing the respondents No. 2 to 4 to take an appropriate decision on the order of suspension deciding as to whether the service of the petitioner has to be continued under suspension or the order of suspension needs revocation.

4. According to the Counsel for the petitioner, he has been placed under suspension because of his implication in a criminal case. That the said criminal case is only at the stage where the charge-sheet has been recently filed and it would take a very long time for the trial to conclude. Therefore, the authorities may reconsider whether the petitioner should be taken back in service or not.

5. Given the said facts and circumstances of the case, the respondents No. 2 to 4 to take an appropriate decision in-respect-of continuation of the suspension of the petitioner at the earliest preferably 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

6. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of. Sd/-

1. P. Sam Koshy Judge Jyotijha