Saravanakumar v. The District Collector,
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 18.03.2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR Saravanakumar ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The District Collector, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram.
2.The Sub Collector/ Revenue Divisional Officer, Paramakudi, Ramanathapuram District.
... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent to reinstate the petitioner with all attendant benefits by considering the petitioner's representation dated 04.12.2025 within the stipulated time fixed by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Gokulraj For Respondents : Mr.S.Shajibino Special Government Pleader Page No. 1 of 8
O R D E R
Heard Mr.S.Gokulraj, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.S.Shajibino, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.
2. The petitioner herein, while working as a Village Administrative Officer, was placed under suspension by proceedings dated 14.05.2025, as he was involved in a criminal case and was arrested in Crime No.10 of 2025 under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, read with the Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act, 2018.
3. The said criminal case is stated to be still pending and is likely to take considerable time for conclusion. The petitioner appears to have submitted a representation dated 04.12.2025 seeking review of his promotion. Complaining of the inaction on the part of the respondents in considering the said representation, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present Writ Petition.
4. Mr.S.Shaji Bino, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, submits that the case of the petitioner is required to be Page No. 2 of 8
reviewed in terms of the guidelines laid down in G.O.Ms.No.81, Human Resources Management (N) Development Department, dated 04.08.2022 and therefore, appropriate orders will be passed reviewing the suspension of the petitioner.
5. In the light of the above, without going into the merits of the case, this Writ Petition is disposed of at the admission stage itself with the consent of both parties.
6. Through G.O.Ms.No.81, Human Resources Management (N) Development Department, dated 04.08.2022, the Government has laid down certain guidelines with respect to the review of suspension, in the interest of the State as well as of the respective employees, in Paragraph 11 of the said G.O., which reads as under:
"11. The Government, after careful examination, reiterates the guidelines issued in the Government Order second read above with slight modification as follows:- (i) The power of ordering suspension should be exercised carefully and with restraint. Before a suspension order is issued, the authority concerned must be clear in mind that it is necessary, Prolonged suspension means that Government pays a Government Servant without extracting any work from him. In view of the above position, the suspension should not be Page No. 3 of 8
resorted to unless the concerned authority has considered all the relevant factors and recorded his reasoned conclusion that it is in the public interest to place the Government Servant under suspension. (ii) Where a Government Servant has been suspended on disciplinary proceedings contemplated, such proceedings should be initiated immediately and finalized normally within a period of six months. (iii) In cases, where a Government Servant has been suspended and the matter has been referred for investigation to the Director of Vigilance and AntiCorruption for enquiry, the latter should complete the enquiry and send the report to Government through the Vigilance Commission within one year.
(iv) In respect of cases referred to under items (ii) and (iii) above, the authority who ordered the suspension or the Director of Vigilance and AntiCorruption, as the case may be, should, before the expiry of the period of three months, report the matter to the Head of the Department/Government, indicating the progress of the disciplinary action/investigation by the Director of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, the reasons for non completion of the work and the further time required for completing the disciplinary action / investigation and furnish reasons for continuing the suspension, if continued suspension is felt essential. If the authority which initiated action in the first instance is the Head of the Department, the report has to be sent to Government.
(v) After the initial report referred to in item (iv) above, reports should be sent to Government at the end of every three months, indicating the further progress, so as to enable the Government to review the suspension and the progress of the case, for such action as may be necessary to ensure expeditious disposal. Page No. 4 of 8
(vi) The Head of the Department or the Government as the case may be, will examine the cases with reference to the subject matter of the disciplinary action/investigation in progress and the reported stage of progress and permit the continued suspension beyond three months / six months. Where the Government itself, have ordered suspension, it will examine the case on the same lines and pass similar order.
(vii) The disciplinary authorities should ensure that the delay in processing the case is not due to delaying tactics of the Government Servant. They should ensure that all notices issued to the suspended Government Servant should reach him without any loss of time.
(viii) When the disciplinary authority comes to a conclusion suo-motu or after conclusion of the investigation by the Director of Vigilance and AntiCorruption, the disciplinary authority shall, while initiating action by issue of charges under Rule 17(b) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules or under Rule 3(b) of the Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1955, as the case may be, examine with reference to the facts established, which form the basis for the charges, whether public interest or the needs for further proceedings will require continued suspension of the Government Servant already under suspension.
(ix) The time limits mentioned above will not be applicable to cases of Government Servants against whom criminal proceedings have been initiated. However, while sanctioning prosecution in such a criminal case, an examination similar to the one mentioned in item (viii) above shall be made by the competent authority.
Page No. 5 of 8
(x) If, on examination of the case under items (vi), (viii) or (ix) above, continued suspension is considered not necessary, the suspension may be revoked in exercise of the powers conferred under Rule 17(e)(6) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules or under Rule 3(e)(5) of the Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1955, as the case may be.
(xi) In cases where the charge in the criminal case involves complicated questions of law and fact and the disciplinary authority is not in a position to finalize dhe departmental disciplinary proceeding and if the criminal case is based on the vigilance report and is pending before the court of law for which no reasons are expred explicitly, the authority compelent may take a decision by taking up review of suspension and post the Government Servant in a non-sensitive place in consultation with the appropriate investigating authority / Vigilance Commission on case to case basis in view of the reason that prolonged suspension and paying subsistence allowance for a acceptable Such revocation of suspension can be made based on the facts of each case and after noticing the reason for the delay in serving the memorandam of charges / charge sheet. The decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in P. Kannan case, given in para 5 above, shall be taken into account.
(xii) Suspension will continue to be in force unless it is revoked as mentioned under item (x) above."
7. In the light of the above, this Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the second respondent to consider the representation dated Page No. 6 of 8
04.12.2025 submitted by the petitioner and review the suspension order dated 14.05.2025 issued against him, taking into consideration the guidelines laid down in G.O.Ms.No.81, Human Resources Management (N) Development Department, dated 04.08.2022 and pass appropriate orders thereon as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. 18.03.2026 JEN NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No To 1.The District Collector, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram.
2.The Sub Collector/ Revenue Divisional Officer, Paramakudi, Ramanathapuram District.
Page No. 7 of 8
MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR , J.
JEN 18.03.2026 Page No. 8 of 8