Sushri Nirmala Chaturvedi v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 1286 of 2017 • Sushri Nirmala Chaturvedi D/o Shri Mehtruram Chaturvedi, Aged About 37 Years Working As Supervisor in Integrated Child Development Project Dondilohara, Distt. Balod, R/o Village Thanaud, Post Anjora, Tah. & Distt. Durg, Civil And Revenue Distt. Durg (Chhattisgarh) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Women And Child Development Department, Mahanadi Bhavan, New Raipur, Distt Raipur, (Chhattisgarh)

2. Commissioner, Women And Child Development Department, Indrawati Bhavan, Raipur, Distt. Raipur, (Chhattisgarh)

3. Collector, Balod, Distt. Balod, (Chhattisgarh)

4. District Program Officer, Women And Child Development Department, Balod, Distt. Balod, (Chhattisgarh)

5. Project Officer, Integrated Child Development Department, Block Dondilohara, Distt. Balod, (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, Advocate.

For State / Respondents :

Shri Adhiraj Surana, Dy. GA SB: Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 16/03/2017 1.

The Petitioner through the present writ petition prays for issuance of a direction to respondents for releasing of the entire salary for the period in which she remained under suspension i.e. from 07.11.2014 to 12.10.2015.

2.

Form the record, undoubtedly it reflects that the Petitioner was suspended on 07.11.2014 and departmental enquiry was ordered to be initiated against the Petitioner. After completion of the enquiry final order of punishment was passed on 12.10.2015 in which the Petitioner

was imposed with penalty of stoppage of one annual increment with noncumulative effect.

3.

Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the order of punishment has been challenged in the appeal before the appellate authority, which is still pending. According to him, the present writ petition has been filed on the ground that the respondents have not given any specific reason as to how the period of suspension is to be treated. The Petitioner has also made couple of representations in this regard to the Respondents which also have not been decided. 4.

This court does not intend to keep the petition pending for a simple reason that the appeal against said order of punishment is pending consideration before the authorities concerned. Let the petitioner move an application bringing the aforesaid facts with regard to how the period of suspension is to be treated so that the respondents may act at least in this regard and pass appropriate order in accordance with the C.G. Fundamental Rules regulating the service conditions of the Petitioner. Apart from that, certain representations are also pending consideration with respect to release of salary for the period the petitioner remained under suspension. These aspects can also be considered by the respondent authorities by deciding the representations pending before it without any further unnecessary delay.

5.

The present writ petition is disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) JUDGE chandra