SUNIL KUMAR YADAV Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) According to the petitioner, he was suspended on 10.01.2020 under Rule 9 (1) (a) of the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966. Subsequently, initially the charge-sheet was not served, however, lately the charge-sheet was served on 24.04.2020 vide Annexure P-5. It is contended that despite the charge-sheet has been served, no enquiry officer has been appointed yet.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the suspension order was passed on 10.01.2020 and despite the lapse of 90 days, the suspension is not revoked, therefore, it would be against the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Ajay Kumar Choudhary Vs. Union of India , 2015 7 SCC 291. He would further submit that under the circumstances, the petitioner has made representation on 23.04.2020 (Annexure P-4) and lastly representation was made on 17.08.2020 (Annexure P-9) and the same may be directed to be decided in terms of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Ajay Kumar Choudhary (supra).