The competent authority must decide on the suspension period; failure to do so entitles the employee to full salary for that period.

ORDER :

Sujoy Paul, J.

1. Sri K. Sudhakar Reddy, learned counsel, appeared for the petitioner and Sri Harender Pershad, learned Senior Counsel representing Sri A. Naren Rudra, learned counsel, appeared for the respondent.

2. With the consent finally heard.

3. This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution challenges the order dated 20.10.2023 whereby the respondent- High Court has rejected the representation of the petitioner claiming that period of suspension shall be treated as spent on duty with full pay and allowances.

4. Briefly stated, the petitioner was served with a charge sheet dated 14.08.2019. The petitioner submitted her written submissions on 30.09.2019. The petitioner was placed under suspension on 31.10.2019. The enquiry report was submitted on 06.04.2022. After obtaining petitioner's response to enquiry officer's report, the punishment order dated 25.08.2022 was passed whereby the petitioner's suspension was also revoked and a minor penalty of "stoppage of one increment without cumulative effect for a period of one year" was inflicted on her. The petitioner, in furtherance of this order, was re-instated and resumed back. Since the Department did not pass any order regularizing the period of suspension, the petitioner preferred a representation which was rejected by the impugned order.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that while re- instating the petitioner as per FR-54B(5) of Fundamental Rules, the competent authority was under a statutory obligation to take a decision regarding the suspension period. Since no decision was taken, the petitioner preferred the aforesaid representation, which was erroneously rejected. The two-fold submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that in view of judgment of Supreme Court in Vijay Kumar Agarwal v. Union of India (2015) 17 SCC 625, when a minor penalty is imposed and the Department has not taken decision regarding grant of pay and allowances for the period of suspension, the authorities are denuded from passing such an order and inevitable consequence of the same is grant of full salary for the period of suspension. The second submission is based on the decision of this Court in A. Shiva Kumar Lal v. State of Telangana, W.P. No. 6405 of 2019 whereby, in a case where major penalty disciplinary proceedings ended with a minor penalty, the period of suspension was directed to be treated on duty with full pay and allowances.

6. Per contra, learned Senior Counsel for the respondent-High Court supported the impugned order. He further submits that the petition is opposed mainly on twin grounds. Firstly, the petitioner has accepted the part of the order dated 25.08.2022 whereby, she was directed to be re-instated. She did not promptly challenge the inaction of respondent in not passing an order relating to period of suspension. For this purpose, reliance is placed on the decision of the Jharkhand High Court in Bharat Coking Coal Limited and others v. Indrasani Devi 2020 SCC OnLine Jhar 1706. Secondly, in view of judgment of the Supreme Court in Sanat Kumar Dwivedi v. Dhar Jila Sahakari Bhoomi Vikas Bank Mary Adit (2001) 9 SCC 402, the petitioner once accepted the re-instatement order, cannot be permitted to claim wages as an afterthought.

7. Learned counsel for the parties confined their arguments to the extent indicated above.

8. The admitted facts are that a major penalty charge sheet ended with a minor punishment. As per FR-54B(5) of Fundamental Rules, the competent authority was under an obligation to take a decision regarding suspension period as per the parameters laid down in sub-rule (5) of FR-54B. Admittedly, the competent authority did not take any decision while passing the punishment order or immediately thereafter. In a case of this nature, where it was imperative for the competent authority to take a decision as per the statute, the judgment of the Supreme Court in Bharat Coking Coal Limited (supra), cannot be pressed into service. For the same