Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Mummineni Sudheer Kumar, J
P. Swaminathan – Appellant
Versus
District Collector Dindigul – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court intervention regarding prolonged suspension of a public servant. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. obligation of disciplinary authorities to review suspension guided by specific government orders. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. issuance of directive for time-bound review of suspension orders. (Para 9) |
O R D E R
Ms.K.Porkodi, learned counsel for the Government, 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 counsel for the Government appearing for the respondents.
4. This writ petition has been filed aggrieved by the impugned order dated 05.01.2023, passed by the second respondent, whereby the petitioner was placed under suspension consequent upon his involvement in a vigilance case in Crime No.01 of 2023 under Section 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
5. The said criminal case is still pending for trial. Aggrieved by the continued prolonged suspension, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.
6. Learned counsel for the Government appearing for the respondents, on instructions, submitted tha
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
