Suspension of public servants is an interim measure for conducting fair investigations and cannot be quashed based on the merits of the allegations. Caution must be exercised in dealing with corruption cases, and honest officials have a duty to report corrupt activities.

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the Respondent culminating in her impugned proceeding bearing Roc.6343/2016(A2) dated 26.10.2018 placing the petitioner under suspension, quash the same and consequently direct the respondent to extend all service benefits to the petitioner.)

1. The order of suspension dated 26.10.2018 is under challenge in the present writ petition.

2. The writ petitioner was holding the Post of Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition and on account of the allegation of corruption, the writ petitioner is placed under suspension.

3. The learned counsel for the writ petitioner vehemently contended that the writ petitioner is no way connected with the allegations stated in the impugned order of suspension. Though the learned counsel for the writ petitioner states that a criminal case was registered against the writ petitioner under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act during the year 2016, no actions were initiated for about 2 years on the criminal complaint.

4. When the writ petitioner was in verge of his promotion, the impugned order of suspension has been issued. The learned counsel for the writ petitioner submits that the writ petitioner is an upright official and he has never faced any adverse remarks throughout his career and based on the false allegations, the respondent placed the writ petitioner under suspension.

5. The writ petitioner was frequently subjected to transfers as he had never yielded to the illegal request of the persons. Thus, the order of suspension is liable to be scrapped.

6. The learned counsel for the writ petitioner further states that there is no application of mind on the part of the respondent, while passing the impugned order of suspension. There is no element of public interest involved with reference to the reasons stated in the impugned order. The authority competent has not satisfied with reference to the ingredients stated in Rule 17(e) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services Discipline and Appeal Rules. Thus, the order of suspension is liable to be set aside.

7. The learned Special Government Pleader states that undoubtedly, a criminal case under the Prevention of Corruption Act has been registered against the writ petitioner and the same was not brought to the notice of the respondent immediately. The respondent has no occasion to know about the registration of criminal case against the writ petitioner under the Prevention of Corruption Act. Thus, the delay cannot be held against the respondent. Soon after the fact regarding the registration of a criminal case was informed to the respondent, appropriate actions were initiated and the writ petitioner is placed under suspension since the allegations against the writ petitioner are in relation to certain corrupt activities.

8. The learned counsel for the writ petitioner urged this Court to consider the nature of the complaint submitted by the complainant namely, Mr.K.Lakshmanan. On the reading of the complaint, there is no specific allegation against the writ petitioner and more so, the writ petitioner was not holding the particular post during the relevant point of time. Thus, the complaint itself has no basis for initiation of disciplinary proceedings against the writ petitioner.

9. Considering the arguments as advanced by the respective learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties to the lis, this Court is of an opinion that suspension is not a punishment. Suspension is an interim arrangement to keep the public servant away from performing the official duties and responsibilities for the purpose of conducting free and fair investigation and enquiries. Suspension being an interim arrangement, cannot be quashed based on the merits of the allegations nor on the basis of certain documents or complaint. Even, on contemplation of charges, an employee can be placed under suspension. An information to