Court No. - 33
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 12266 of 2021 Petitioner :- Dinesh Kumar Yadav Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Prem Prakash Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Jai Bahadur Singh
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.
This writ petition is directed against an order of suspension passed by the Chairman and Administrator of the Project, dated 26th March, 2021. This order records that a complaint has been made against the petitioner, in which an enquiry report was called for within fifteen days. Since allegations in the complaint are said to be serious and the petitioner has not been cooperating by furnishing relevant documents, therefore, the petitioner has been placed under suspension. It is also stated that petitioner has submitted certain manipulated reports in his favour. The order of suspension is challenged on the ground that though sufficient time has expired, but till date even a chargesheet has not been served upon the petitioner. Reliance is placed upon a judgment of the Supreme Court in Ajay Kumar Chaudhary Vs. Union of India & Others reported in (2015) SCC, 291 in order to submit that continuance of petitioner's suspension for so long is arbitrary.
A personal affidavit has been filed by the Chairman in response to the previous order passed by this Court, as per which, certain enquiry report etc. has been manipulated by the petitioner.
Be that as it may, it is not in issue that petitioner has been continuing under suspension for the last more than seven months. The basis of suspension is alleged complaint, which is yet to be verified. There is no reference in the order of any definite charge against the petitioner. Even if the complaint was made against the petitioner, it was open for the authorities to have investigated the facts and serve at least the chargesheet upon the petitioner during the last seven months. Since no chargesheet has been served upon the petitioner, he cannot be kept indefinitely under suspension.
The argument advanced on behalf of the petitioner that no satisfaction has been recorded in the order impugned that charges against the petitioner are serious enough so as to warrant imposition of major punishment, if they are proved, is found to have substance. Neither the charges are specified, nor such a satisfaction exists in the order.
Considering the materials placed on record and the arguments advanced, it would be appropriate to dispose of this petition, finally, at this stage itself, by issuing following directions:-
(i) A chargesheet would be served by the respondents upon the petitioner within a period of one month from today.
(ii) The petitioner shall submit a reply to the chargesheet and the proceedings of enquiry would be got concluded within a period of four months, thereafter.
(iii) The order of suspension, dated 26th March, 2021 shall be kept in abeyance and shall abide by the final orders to be passed in the disciplinary enquiry proceedings, in which petitioner undertakes to cooperate. Payment of difeence of salary, for the period petitioner remained under suspension shall abide by the final orders passed in the enquiry.
Order Date :- 28.10.2021 Ranjeet Sahu