[2026:RJ-JD:17341]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8157/2026 Virendra Kumar Nag S/o Shri Kanhaiyalal Nag, Aged About 43 Years, Resident Of Pura Mohalla, Shiv Gali, Jalore, Rajasthan.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department Of Personnel (K-3), Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

2. District Collector, Jalore, Rajasthan.

3. Sub-Divisional Officer, Ahore, District Jalore, Rajasthan.

----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Yashraj Singh Kumawat For Respondent(s) :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA

Order

15/04/2026

1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayer:-

i) by issuing an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof and thereby quash and set aside the impugned suspension order dated

14.08.2025 (Annexure-03);

ii) by issuing an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof and thereby direct the respondent authorities to reinstate the petitioner in service with full back wages along with other consequential benefits;

iii) Any other appropriate order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in favour of the petitioner may kindly be passed with cost.

2. It is stated that only on account of the fact that petitioner was falsely implicated in a criminal case under the provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act, the petitioner was placed under suspension vide order dated 14.08.2025 exercising un-necessary of power under Rule 13 of Rajasthan Civil Services, (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1958. (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the Rules of 1958’)

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that although the suspension order was issued on 14.08.2025 yet till this date no charge-sheet under the Rules of 1958 has been issued and served upon the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble the Supreme Court in the case of Ajay Kumar Choudhary vs. Union of India (2015) 7 SCC 29.

4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.

5. In case of Ajay Kumar Choudhary (supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court has given broad guidelines that, in case, an employee has been placed under suspension then the suspension order should be followed by a charge-sheet under the statutory rules and, in case, charge-sheet is not issued within a period of three months from the date of suspension, then the employer is under an obligation to review the suspension order. As per learned counsel for the petitioner, till date, no such review has been conducted by the respondents.

6. In view of the above, this Court deems it just and proper to to dispose of the writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to submit a representation before the competent authority which shall consider and decide the representation in light of the judgment of Ajay Kumar Choudhary (supra) for reviewing the suspension order. The speaking order shall be passed within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of representation either for revoking suspension order or for extending the same by assigning cogent reasons in accordance with law.

7. All other pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

(ANAND SHARMA),J

28-Taruna/-