Smt. Tika Bai Divya v. State Of Chhattisgarh
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 2633 of 2020 Smt. Tika Bai Divya, W/o. Anand Mahilange, Aged About 37 Years, Occupation - Assistant Teacher (Municipal Corporation), Primary School, Lalghat, Block And District - Korba Chhattisgarh. Present Address - Satnam Nagar, Police Station - Balco Nagar, District - Korba Chhattisgarh.
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through - Secretary, Urban Administration And Development Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Capital Complex, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh.
2. Collector, Korba, District - Korba Chhattisgarh.
3. District Education Officer, Korba, District - Korba Chhattisgarh.
4. Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Saket Bhawan, I.T.I. Chowk, Rampur, Korba District - Korba Chhattisgarh.
5. Block Education Officer, Korba, Block And District - Korba Chhattisgarh.
6. Head Master, A.J.K. Primary School, Lalghat, Block And District - Korba Chhattisgarh.
----Respondents For Petitioner :
Shri Dharmesh Shrivastava, Advocate.
For State/Respondents :
Shri N. Naha Roy, Advocate.
No.1 to 3, 5 & 6.
For Respondent No.4 :
Shri Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri
ORDER
10/07/2020 Heard.
1.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that only grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner has been suspended on 19/02/2020 and till today neither charge sheet has been supplied nor any further action have been taken on the suspension. He submits that in view of the law laid down in case of Ajay Kumar Choudhary Vs. Union of India (UOI) & Ors. reported in LAWS (SC) 2015 2 57 wherein it has been held that suspension cannot be for the indefinite period and refers to para 14 which
reads as under:- "14. We, therefore, direct that the currency of a Suspension Order should not extend beyond three months if within this period the Memorandum of Charges/Chargesheet is not served on the delinquent officer/employee; if the Memorandum of Charges/Chargesheet is served a reasoned order must be passed for the extension of the suspension. As in the case in hand, the Government is free to transfer the concerned person to any Department in any of its offices within or outside the State so as to sever any local or personal contact that he may have and which he may misuse for obstructing the investigation against him. The Government may also prohibit him from contacting any person, or handling records and documents till the stage of his having to prepare his defence. We think this will adequately safeguard the universally recognized principle of human dignity and the right to a speedy trial and shall also preserve the interest of the Government in the prosecution.
We recognize that previous Constitution Benches have been reluctant to quash proceedings on the grounds of delay, and to set time limits to their duration. However, the imposition of a limit on the period of suspension has not been discussed in prior case law, and would not be contrary to the interests of justice. Furthermore, the direction of the Central Vigilance Commission that pending a criminal investigation departmental proceedings are to be held in abeyance stands superseded in view of the stand adopted by us."
2.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner may be given liberty to file a representation before the concerned authority which may be directed to be decided.
3.
Considering the fact that the petitioner was suspended on 19.02.2020 and as on today as has been averred charge sheet has not been given, considering the law laid down in case of Ajay Kumar Choudhary (supra) and the prayer as has been made, it is directed that in case the petitioner makes a representation within a period of 3 weeks, the same shall be decided within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of the representation.
4.
With such observation, the petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) JUDGE Ashok