SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(UK) 154043

HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
RADHEY SHYAM – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND – Respondent
WPSS 73 / 2023



Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings SL.

Date or directions COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS No.

and Registrar’s order with Signatures WPSS/ 73/ 2023 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J

1. Mr. Dinesh Gahtori, learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. Mr. Rajeev Singh Bisht, learned Additional C.S.C. for the State of Uttarakhand.

3. Petitioner is serving as Accountant in Uttarakhand Sanskrit Academy, Haridwar. He was put under suspension vide order dated 21.12.2022. Petitioner has challenged his suspension on various grounds. One of the grounds is that petitioner had simply followed the instructions of his Superior Authorities, and as Accountant, he had passed the bills and he has unnecessarily been framed in the matter, based on false charges.

4. Interim order was passed by this Court in favour of petitioner on 25.02.2023, whereby impugned suspension order was stayed. The interim order is still operating.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although charge-sheet was issued, which was replied by petitioner, and the Enquiry Officer had given a finding in favour of petitioner that none of the charge has been found to be proved, however, the Disciplinary Authority has ordered for re-enquiry on

02.08.2024.

6. It is contended that the manner in which High Powered Committee has been constituted by the Disciplinary Authority reveals that there is something more to it than what meets the eye.

7. This Court finds some substance in the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner. The order of suspension passed against a Government Servant cannot be permitted to continue till eternity. Three long years have gone by since passing of suspension order. The Disciplinary Enquiry is yet to be concluded. No useful purpose would be served by keeping this writ petition pending.

8. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of by providing that the Competent Authority shall ensure that Disciplinary Enquiry, initiated against the petitioner, is concluded within two months from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order. The suspension order shall be kept in abeyance till passing of the final order by Disciplinary Authority. Petitioner shall continue to discharge his duties at his present place of posting.

(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J)

18.12.2025 Aswal N S A I S I N T W G I R A H A L J Do28s5SD teI .0C uiN a 5 Nr g 2tiU : G 4ae a tHc lT : 3 a HDN = 2 lG0 A I u0 A yNH mC S 8R s,e 5FW b iCo bag . 0= 1 OKce n A 8 2 H Hr Ue L d6Id A 6 RG7148 1NTb53H 00 D6E y C4 CeB9, NF 1: O553 I F 714 T 1 U E 82C R B82 1a A FA eO -0 J 05 90FS 88 3B IK ' UN 7,3 f TG 6p1 89 H oN98s 2 A3RD Cta4S B ,lfW CK 60H Fo7A 1d4L 0eN , C=c D 2n 02,6 5E3N a3ITD812 R 5,6 A fF9 J

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top