IMPORTANT POINT
Suspension can be upheld beyond 90 days if a charge-sheet is issued, and the employer's authority is not arbitrary when prima facie misconduct is evident.

JUDGMENT :

Ravindra V. Ghuge, J.

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally, by the consent of the parties.

2. The Petitioner, by filing this Petition on 18/08/2024, has put forth prayer clauses (B) and (C) as under :-

“B) By issuing a writ of certiorari, orders, directions or any other appropriate writ in like nature, the impugned suspension order dated 15.05.2024 thereby placing the petitioner under suspension issued by Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, may kindly be quashed and set aside and for that purpose issue necessary orders;

C) Pending hearing and final disposal of this writ petition, the impugned suspension order dated 15.05.2024 thereby placing the petitioner under suspension issued by Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, may kindly be stayed and the petitioner may be reinstated in service on his earlier post from where she is suspended and for that purpose, issue necessary orders;”

3. The Petitioner had earlier approached this Court in Writ Petition No.14409/2023, seeking issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to the Respondent/Zilla Parishad to transfer her to a particular Health Centre, as per her choice. Since we showed our disinclination to entertain the Petition, the Petitioner prayed that, her representation dated 30/09/2023 may be considered by the Zilla Parishad. Vide the said representation, she had prayed that, she should be posted at Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar. The Writ Petition was disposed off, expecting the Zilla Parishad to deal with her representation.

4. The grievance in this Petition is that, Respondent No.3/ Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, has placed the Petitioner under suspension vide the impugned order dated 15/05/2024. The Petitioner had made a grievance that, she was being harassed by the Medical Officer and a Health Worker. They insisted that, she should reside in the staff quarters and that the Petitioner has frequently quarreled with these two persons. Her medical bill is not cleared and kept pending. Sometimes she is not allowed to sign the muster roll, etc. etc. Hence, she has been deliberately placed under suspension.

5. The Petitioner further contends that, this Petition has been filed on the 93rd day of her suspension. The 90 days are over and this Petition, having been filed on the 3rd day after completion of 90 days of suspension, deserves to be entertained and the suspension order deserves to be quashed and set aside.

6. It is trite that, a Court should not step into the shoes of the Employer and assess, as to whether the Petitioner deserved to be suspended or not. The fact remains that the Petitioner has been served with the charge-sheet cum show cause notice, dated 23/08/2024. Around six charges have been levelled upon her. The Zilla Parishad has initiated a Departmental Enquiry against the Petitioner. Since the Petitioner has locked her residence (the address on the record of the Zilla Parishad), further communications attempted to be served upon her by the Respondent/Zilla Parishad, have proved to be a futile exercise. One such document dated 29/08/2024, along with the report of witnesses, is shown to the Court.

7. The learned Advocate for the Petitioner has placed heavy reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Ajay Kumar Choudhari Vs. Union of India, [AIR 2015 SC 2389]. In the said case, the Appellant’s suspension, dated 30/09/2011, was extended for a period of 180 days, which was followed by an extension of the same period on the 2nd occasion. On the 3rd and 4th occasions, the extension was for 90 days each. In all, his suspension continued from 30/09/2011 until June 2013, without any disciplinary proceedings. He approached the Central Administrative Tribunal (Tribunal), which ordered that, if a charge-sheet has not been issued to the Appellant until 21/06/2013, the Appellant would be reinstated in service. The Union of India approached the Delhi High Court, whi