S.Jayasudha v. The Revenue Divisional Officer
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 07.10.2025
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.D. JAGADISH CHANDIRA and W.M.P. No.42117 of 2025 S. Jayasudha ... Petitioner vs.
The Revenue Divisional Officer, Erode District.
... Respondent Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, call for the records connected with the Ref. No.647/2025/A2 dated 08.02.2025 passed by the Respondent herein and quash the same and consequently direct the Respondent to reinstate the petitioner into service in the light of the Government Letter No. 13519/N/2015-1 23.07.2015 and Government order in G.O.Ms.No.81 Human Resources Management (N) Department dated 04.08.2022. For petitioner : Mr.S. Ilamvaludhi For respondent : Mr.K. Surendran Addl.Govt. Pleader - - - - - - 1/6
ORDER
Mr.K. Surendran, learned Additional Government Pleader, takes notice for respondent.
By consent of both the parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.
2. Short facts leading to filing of this writ petition are as follows :- a) The petitioner was appointed as Village Administrative Officer on compassionate ground on 30.08.2019 and she has been continuously serving in the said post till date. Based on a complaint lodged by one A. Manju, a criminal case was registered against the petitioner and another by name Sabari, under Section 7(1) and 12 r/w 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Amended Act, 2018 in Crime No.01/AC/2021. Subsequently, she was placed under suspension, vide proceedings of the respondent in Ref. No.647/2025/A2, dated 08.02.2025.
b) In the aforesaid complaint, the complainant has alleged that her father had purchased a particular property, which was subsequently sold to her, and in order to obtain patta for the said property, she had approached the petitioner. While so, Sabari demanded money on behalf of the petitioner for issuance of 2/6
patta in her favour. According to the petitioner, a mere perusal of the FIR and seizure Mahazar reveals that there is absolutely no demand and acceptance on her part.
c) The grievance of the petitioner is that she has been falsely implicated in the corruption case and ventilating the aforesaid facts, she submitted a representation on 16/08/2025 to the respondent seeking revocation of suspension. However, neither her representation was considered nor she was reinstated into service. Hence, this writ petition has been filed with the aforesaid prayer.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was unnecessarily implicated in the case and was arrested on 06.02.2025, and later, released on bail. Further, by pointing out the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Case of Ajay Kumar Choudhary v. Union of India, reported in (2015) 7 SCC 291 as well as guidelines issued in G.O. Ms. No.81, Human Resources Management(N) Department, dated 04.08.2022 and very many orders issued by this Court in identical matters, he submitted that the proceedings dated 08.02.2025 issued by the respondent is illegal and is unjustifiable. Further, he submitted that the petitioner restricts the relief sought 3/6
in this writ petition, and it would suffice if a direction is issued to the respondent to consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 16.08.2025, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent.
5. It is well settled by a number of judgments of this Court that, in terms of G.O. Ms. No.81, Human Resources Management(N) Department, dated 04.08.2022, all orders of suspension are required to be periodically reviewed.
6. Replying to the above, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioner's representation dated 16.08.2025 will be considered by the respondent on its own merits and in accordance with law, after affording due opportunity to the petitioner, within a reasonable time to be fixed by this Court.
7. Considering the fair submission made by the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent, without going into the merits of the case, this Court directs the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 16.08.2025, with regard to her claim for reinstatement into 4/6
service, and pass appropriate orders on merits, in accordance with law, and in the light of guidelines issued in G.O. Ms. No.81, Human Resources Management(N) Department, dated 04.08.2022 after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
8. The writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 07.10.2025 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order vsi2 To The Revenue Divisional Officer, Erode District.
5/6
A.D. JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.
vsi2 and W.M.P.No.42117 of 2025 07.10.2025 6/6