Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Ramesh Sinha, CJ, BIBHU DATTA GURU
Mansingh Bhardwaj S/o Shri Nandlal Bhardwaj – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through- Avar Secretary School Education Department – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. discussion on authority and jurisdiction in suspension matters. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 2. decision on the validity of the suspension order. (Para 16) |
| 3. outcome of the appeal and instructions for further action. (Para 17) |
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Mr. Rajeev Shrivastava, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. A.S. Rajput, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. Yashwant Singh Thakur, learned Additional Advocate General, appearing for the State.
3. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is serving as a Principal and is also discharging the duties of Block Education Officer, presently posted at Jagdalpur, District Bastar. It is alleged that the appellant submitted manipulated and incorrect information to the competent authorities in relation to the rationalization of teachers, in contravention of the instructions issued on 02.08.2024 concerning the said process. In view of the alleged misconduct and violation of Rule (i), (ii), and (iii) of the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1965 (for short, ‘Rules of 1965’), the appellant was placed under suspension by order dated 06.06.2025, issued by respondent No. 4.
5. It is further contended by th
Only authorized authority can exercise disciplinary powers; any order by an unauthorized entity is invalid.
Suspension orders must reflect independent decision-making by statutory authorities and cannot be arbitrary or merely routine; otherwise, they may violate constitutional rights.
Disciplinary authority - Delegated power to impose penalties - Commissioner empowered by notification in respect of Class III officer (Tahsildar) is justified in placing him under suspension - If emp....
The court upheld the suspension of a teacher for misconduct, emphasizing the need for discipline in educational institutions.
The approval of a suspension order without a charge sheet and without affording the employee an opportunity to be heard violates principles of natural justice.
Suspension orders must be reviewed within 90 days; failure to do so renders them invalid, emphasizing the right to a speedy trial.
Suspension orders must be reviewed within 90 days; indefinite suspension without charges violates CCS (CCA) Rules and principles of personal freedom.
Suspension orders must be reviewed within 90 days to remain valid; failure to do so renders them invalid.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
