Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR
R.Balasubramanian (Under Suspension) – Appellant
Versus
Director of Treasuries and Accounts – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner suspension facts and progress of contempt proceedings (Para 1) |
| 2. petitioner arguments regarding mala fides and prolonged absence of charge memo (Para 2) |
| 3. respondent arguments seeking extension of suspension order (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. legal position on limits of suspension without charge memo and government order (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 5. final directive to review and conclude the proceedings (Para 11) |
ORDER :
MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR, J.
WP(MD)No.31632 of 2025 has been filed seeking a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned order in connection with the proceedings RC.No.1204548/ 2025/Q2 dated 21.08.2025, whereby the petitioner was placed under suspension under Rule 17(e) of Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal Rules. This Court, while entertaining the writ petition, has granted an order of interim stay by order dated on 10.11.2025 and the same is in operation as on date.
2.The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the impugned suspension order has been issued malafidely and the petitioner on an earlier occasion filed WP(MD)No.14666 of 2025 challenging the order of transfer dated 22.05.2025, wherein t
Prolonged suspension beyond three months without serving charge memo is unsustainable.
Prolonged suspension for unrelated criminal case must be reviewed per government guidelines; not automatic continuance.
Point of Law : Mandate of an outer limit of 3 (three) months is only for the purpose of drawing up a departmental proceeding and the requirement to undertake an exercise of review prior to the said p....
Point of law: seriousness and gravity of the misconduct contemplated to be enquired into and the material i.e., voice messages along with the complaint by the complainant Anil Proddaturu and recordin....
The failure to timely review a suspension after the issuance of a Memorandum of Charges renders the suspension invalid, mandating reinstatement.
Continued suspension without charge sheet issuance past 90 days isn't automatically void; justification based on severity of allegations and public interest may uphold the extension.
Prolonged suspension without filing a charge sheet or initiating departmental proceedings is unjustifiable and unsustainable in law.
A suspension order must be accompanied by a reasoned order for extension beyond three months if a charge-sheet is served, ensuring compliance with the principles of natural justice.
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
