M.Chandra Mouli, v. The State Of Telangana,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY W.P.NO.25320 OF 2017

O R D E R

The case of the petitioner, as per the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition is that while he was working as Mandal Parishad Development Officer, MPP, Khanapur of Warangal District, the 2nd respondent - Commissioner of Panchayat Raj and Rural Employment, by proceedings dated 6.7.2017, placed him under suspension for alleged rude behavior. For revoking the suspension, he made representations on 22.7.2016 and 7.10.2016 to the 2nd respondent. As there was inaction, he made representation on 27.7.2016 to the 1st respondent - State of Telangana, represented by its Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj and Rural Employment to revoke his suspension. While the matter stood thus, the 2nd respondent issued charge memo by proceedings dated 31.1.

2017, framing three charges and the petitioner submitted his explanation on 27.3.2017, but no Inquiry Officer has been appointed till date. The case of the petitioner is that as per G.O.Ms.No.86, General Administration (Ser.C) Department dated 8.3.1994, the suspension order against a Government servant shall be reviewed at the end of every six months for reinstatement. Now the grievance of the petitioner is that he is under suspension since 6.7.2016 and the six months period within which the review has to take place, expired on 5.7.2017 and till date he is being continued under suspension and his representations, the latest being 27.7.2016, have not been considered. Hence the writ petition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services.

From the facts noted above, it could be seen that the petitioner was placed under suspension by the proceedings of the 2nd respondent on 6.7.2016 and by 6.7.2017, the one year period had elapsed and still he is being continued under suspension. Petitioner was also issued with charge memo dated 31.1.2017 and he claims to have submitted his explanation on 27.3.2017. As per G.O.Ms.No.86 dated 8.3.1994 the order of suspension against a Government Servant shall be reviewed at the end of every six months. In the present case, as noted above, one year period also elapsed and as per the averments of the petitioner, no review has taken place till date. In view of these circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission, directing the competent authority i.e., 2nd respondent, to consider the representations of the petitioner dated 22.7.2016, 27.7.2016 and 7.10.2016 and take appropriate action in terms of G.O.Ms.No.86 dated 8.3.1994, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

No order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions pending if any, shall stand closed. ------------------------------------ A.RAJASHEKER REDDY,J DATE:31-07-2017 avs