PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of certiorarfied Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned suspension order in Roc.No.A3/969/2019 dated 22.05.2019 passed by the respondent No.2 and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondent to revoke the suspensions order and reinstate the petitioner as Village Administrative Officer in light of G.O.Ms.No.81 dated 04.08.2022 passed by the Chief Secretary to the Government, Human Resources Management (N) Department by considering the petitioner's representation dated 01.04.2026 with the consequential benefits within the time stipulated by this Court.

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed challenging the proceedings in No.A3/969/2019 dated 22.05.2019, whereby the petitioner was placed under suspension consequent upon his alleged involvement in a vigilance trap case.

2.Though a period of seven years has elapsed, no review of the suspension has been undertaken. Therefore, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 01.04.2026 seeking review of the suspension in terms of the Government Order issued in G.O.Ms.No.81 dated 04.08.2022. However, no further action has been taken by the respondents. Hence, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.

3.Mr.M.Dinesh Hari Sudharsan, learned counsel appearing for the respondents, submitted that the trap case registered against the petitioner is still pending trial and, therefore, there is no necessity to review the order of suspension.

4.This Court has carefully considered the submissions made on either side and perused the materials placed on record.

5.As rightly contended by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, taking into consideration the circumstances in which employees of the State are kept under prolonged suspension without review, and also in light of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court as well as this Court, the Government has issued G.O.Ms.No.81 dated 04.08.2022, prescribing guidelines for review and revocation of suspension after the expiry of three months from the date of suspension.

6.In view of the above, this Court is of the considered view that the respondents are under an obligation to review the order of suspension in the light of the guidelines issued in paragraph No.11 of G.O.(Ms.) No.81, Human Resources Management (N) Department, dated 04.08.2022, which reads as follows:

“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 progr