Back
ARUN BHANSALI
Jageshwar Prasad Sharma – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
JUDGMENT
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved against the order dated 24.12.2019 (Annex.-1), whereby the petitioner has been placed under suspension.
The petitioner made a representation (Annex.-10), inter alia, indicating that already challan against the petitioner has been filed and despite passage of sufficiently long time, the petitioner has not been reinstated and, therefore, the order of suspension requires review and the petitioner deserves to be reinstated.
Learned counsel for the petitioner with reference to judgment in Manvendra Singh v. State of Raj. & Ors.: SBCW No. 4276/2018, decided on 21.12.2018 submitted that the Court in the said judgment has dealt with the powers of the disciplinary authority under Rule 13(5) of the Rules of 1958 and appellate authority under Rule 22 of the Rules of 1958 and has held that the various circulars issued by the State Government laying down limitation to examine the revocation of suspension order after a period of three years from the date of suspension/after a period of one year from the date, the charge-sheet has been filed, was not justified and it was open for the authorities to examine the case for revocation
The court established that disciplinary authorities have the discretion to review suspension orders without being bound by arbitrary time limits set by government circulars, ensuring timely administr....
The authorities have the discretion to examine the revocation of suspension even prior to the periods fixed in the circular issued by the State Government.
Suspension should be periodically reviewed and should not be used as a punitive tool.
The need for continuation of suspension must be assessed based on the nature of allegations, materials, and the position held by the concerned employee.
Government must periodically review prolonged suspensions per G.O. guidelines, ensure subsistence allowance, and expedite disciplinary proceedings.
Suspension under CCS(CCA) Rules lapses if not reviewed before 90 days expiry; subsequent extensions cannot revive invalid order.
Prolonged suspension of an employee without substantial evidence post-disciplinary proceedings is arbitrary and unjustified.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a suspension order must be reviewed within 90 days as per the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, and court judgments, and failure to do so renders the sus....
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
