Government must periodically review prolonged suspensions per G.O. guidelines, ensure subsistence allowance, and expedite disciplinary proceedings.

ORDER :

1. This writ petition has been filed seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to revoke the suspension order issued in proceedings R.C.No.2144/B5/2025 dated 06.08.2025 by considering the representations dated 12.08.2025 and 23.03.2026 submitted by the petitioners.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.N.Satheesh Kumar, learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents.

3. The petitioner herein while working as B.T. Assistant (Tamil) was placed under suspension through proceedings dated 06.08.2025 in exercise of power under Rule 17(e)(1) of Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1955, contemplating to initiate disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner. Accordingly, a charge memo dated 25.11.2025 came to be issued.

4. In response thereto, the petitioner has submitted his explanation and the said proceedings are pending for conclusion. The short grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is that the order of suspension issued as early as on 06.08.2025 is not being reviewed by the competent authority in spite of specific mandate to review the suspension orders in terms of the orders issued by the Government in G.O.(Ms.)No.81, Human Resourced Management(N) Department dated 04.08.2022.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the respondents have also stopped paying subsistence allowance to the petitioner from the month of January 2026, thereby disabling him to contest the disciplinary proceedings.

6. Mr.N.Satheesh Kumar, learned Additional Government Pleader strenuously contended that it is not a fit case to review the order of suspension as there are serious allegations against the petitioner that he misbehaved with girl students. He further submitted that the disciplinary proceedings were also initiated and they are progressing. The learned Additional Government Pleader contended that the question of review of suspension in the present case does not arise.

7. This Court has carefully considered the submissions made on either side and also perused the entire materials available on record.

8. Admittedly, the petitioner was placed under suspension as early as on 06.08.2025 and has been continuing as such even after a lapse of more than eight months and the disciplinary proceedings are pending against the petitioner. Taking into consideration all the delays and laches in conclusion of the disciplinary proceedings and the loss that is being suffered by the exchequer by paying huge amounts towards subsistence allowance, the Government issued orders in G.O.(Ms.)No.81, Human Resources Management(N) Department dated 04.08.2022 requiring the competent authorities to review the order of suspension from time to time and various guidelines have been laid down in paragraph 11 of the said Government order. Paragraph 11 reads as under:

“11. The Government, after careful examination, reiterates the guidelines issued in the Government Order second read above with slight modification as follows:-

(i) The power of ordering suspension should be exercised carefully and with restraint. Before a suspension order is issued, the authority concerned must be clear in mind that it is necessary, Prolonged suspension means that Government pays a Government Servant without extracting any work from him. In view of the above position, the suspension should not be resorted to unless the concerned authority has considered all the relevant factors and recorded his reasoned conclusion that it is in the public interest to place the Government Servant under suspension.

(ii) Where a Government Servant has been suspended on disciplinary proceedings contemplated, such proceedings should be initiated immediately a