The court affirmed the dismissal of the application for deemed suspension amidst ongoing disciplinary proceedings, allowing the petitioner to seek rejoining in accordance with law.

JUDGMENT Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari, J The present Original Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenges the order dated 15.01.2026 passed in O.A. No. 180/00330/2025 by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench, whereby the request for a direction to the respondents to pass an order of deemed suspension was rejected.

2. The learned Central Government Counsel pointed out that two charge sheets have already been issued to the petitioner, initiating disciplinary proceedings for various lapses on her part.

3. We have perused the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal and find no such relief, namely a direction to treat the petitioner as being under deemed suspension, could have been granted. The Tribunal has rightly dismissed the Original Application. We find no error in the order passed by the Tribunal.

4. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondents have not passed any order regarding suspension, termination, or otherwise, and that the disciplinary proceedings are still pending. In such circumstances, it was prayed that she may be permitted to rejoin and continue in service.

5. In view of the above, the petitioner shall be at liberty to approach the authorities seeking permission to rejoin duty, in accordance with law. If no decision is taken on such request within a reasonable time, the petitioner shall also be at liberty to approach the Central Administrative Tribunal seeking redressal of her grievance, in accordance with law.

With the aforesaid liberty, this Original Petition is disposed of.

Sd/-