The suspension of a government employee must adhere to statutory provisions, including timely reviews and service of charges.

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking to declare the action of respondent No.3/District Collector in issuing proceedings vide No.A2/561/2023-1, dated 30.09.2023 and placing the petitioner under suspension and continuing her under suspension without revoking as illegal, biased and arbitrary.

2. Heard Sri Banda Prasada Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Services-I appearing for the respondents.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that while the petitioner was working as Tahsildar and Joint Sub Registrar in Mavala Mandal of Adilabad District, she was placed under suspension on 30.09.2023 vide No.A2/561/2023-1 in connection with an ACB case registered vide FIR No.04/ACB-ADB/2023, dated 24.09.2023, on the file of the Anti-Corruption Bureau, Adilabad Range. Thereafter, the said suspension was reviewed from time to time and finally reviewed on 13.11.2024. It is further submitted that the Hon’ble Apex Court in Ajay Kumar Choudhary v. Union of India 1, has categorically held that a suspension order should not be extended beyond three months if, within this period, the memorandum of charges/charge sheet is not served on the delinquent officer/employee and as per G.O.Ms.No.86 General Administration (Services.C) Department, dated 08.03.1994, the respondents are bound to review the suspension order of the petitioner at the end of every six months. Further, the Government vide G.O.Ms.No.526 dated 19.08.2008 held that the employees who are under suspension for a period exceeding two years shall be reinstated pending finalization of the disciplinary cases/criminal cases against them. However, though nearly two years have been lapsed, the memorandum of charges/charge sheet has been filed so far and respondent No.2 reviewed the suspension order of the petitioner on 13.11.2024. Therefore, learned counsel prays this Court to direct respondent No.3 to revoke the suspension order issued against the petitioner.

4. Learned Government Pleader for Services-I appearing for the respondents submits that abutting to the order of last review of suspension on 13.11.2024, the respondents will review the suspension order of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

1 (2015) 7 Supreme Court Case 291

5. Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the respective parties, this Court is of the view that it is appropriate to direct the respondents to review the suspension order of the petitioner issued vide No.A2/561/2023-1, dated 30.09.2023, strictly in terms of the order issued in G.O.Ms.No.86, General Administration (Ser.C) Department, dated 08.03.1994 and also G.O.Ms.No.526, General Administration (Ser.C) Department, dated 19.08.2008, and in also the light of the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Ajay Kumar Choudhary (supra), and pass appropriate orders thereon, strictly in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, and communicate a copy thereof to the petitioner.

6. With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of.