The court emphasizes the necessity for due process and prompt review regarding governmental suspensions of employees, adhering to established guidelines.

O R D E R

Mr.B.Ramanathan, learned Additional Government Pleader, takes notice for the respondents.

2. With the consent of both sides, this writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

4. The petitioner herein, while working as Village Administrative Officer in Venthoni Group, Paramakudi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District, on certain allegations of corruption, was placed under suspension through proceedings dated 09.10.2025, issued by the second respondent herein and he is being continued under suspension till date. Under those circumstances, the petitioner is claimed to have submitted a representation dated 29.01.2026 to the respondents seeking revocation of the suspension. However, the said representation is still pending consideration before the respondents. Hence, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing this writ petition complaining inaction on the part of the respondents on his representation.

5. Learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, on instructions, submitted that the matter of suspension is now governed by various guidelines issued by the Government vide Government Order in G.O.(Ms) No.81, Human Resources Management (N) Department, dated 04.08.2022 and therefore, the suspension order issued against the petitioner would be reviewed in accordance with the guidelines issued under the said Government Order.

6. In the light of the above, this Court is of the considered view that it would be appropriate to dispose of this writ petition directing the second respondent to review the order of suspension duly taking into consideration the guidelines issued under the said Government Order. It would be appropriate to extract the relevant portion of the said Government Order hereunder:

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 and finalized normally within a period of six months.

(iii) In cases, where a Government Servant has been suspended and the matter has been referred for investigation to the Director of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption for enquiry, the latter should complete the enquiry and send the report to Government through the Vigilance Commission within one year.

(iv) In respect of cases referred to under Items (ii) and (iii) above, the authority who ordered the suspension or the Director of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, as the case may be, should before the expiry of the period of three months, report the matter to the Head of the Department / Government, indicating the progress of the disciplinary action / investigation by the Director of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, the reasons for non completion of the work and the further time required for completing the disciplinary action / investigation and furnish reasons for continuing the suspension, if continued suspension is fell essential. If the authority which initiated action in the first instance is the Head of the Department,