Prolonged suspension without initiating departmental proceedings burdens the public exchequer; therefore, reinstating an employee to a non-sensitive post pending investigation into corruption charges against them is a valid administrative recourse to minimize financial loss.

JUDGMENT

[Judgment of the Court was made by N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.)

Challenging the order of the learned Single Judge in W.P(MD) No.8097 of 2025 dated 24.03.2025, whereby the order of suspension dated 09.01.2024 was set aside and the second respondent therein was directed to reinstate the petitioner into service and post him in non-sensitive post within a period of two weeks, the present Writ Appeal has been filed by the second respondent therein, as appellant.

2.The first respondent/writ petitioner, while serving as an Accountant, was placed under suspension by proceedings dated 09.01.2024, pursuant to the registration of a criminal case in Crime No.1 of 2024 for the offence under Section 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 2018 . The first respondent submitted a representation dated 10.04.2024 to the appellant seeking revocation of the suspension order. As no orders were passed on the said representation, the first respondent filed a Writ Petition.

3.The learned Single Judge, taking into consideration that prolonged suspension would serve no useful purpose and would, in fact, burden the public exchequer by necessitating continuous payment of subsistence allowance, allowed the Writ Petition.

4.Admittedly, the writ petitioner was arrested for an offence under Section 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 2018 , and no domestic enquiry has been initiated. According to the appellant, the domestic enquiry would be commenced only after the conclusion of the criminal proceedings.

5.In such circumstances, we are of the view that the criminal proceedings are likely to take considerable time. Therefore, keeping the employee under prolonged suspension and paying subsistence allowance without extracting any work would result in an unnecessary drain on public funds. We find no merit in the Writ Appeal. The learned Single Judge has rightly considered the issue and appropriately directed the appellant to post the writ petitioner in a non-sensitive post. The appellant is, therefore, directed to comply with the said direction as expeditiously as possible.

6.Accordingly, the Writ Appeal stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.