VANDANA KUJUR Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner who is holding the post of Patwari was put under suspension vide order dtd. 27/10/2022 in contemplation of Departmental Enquiry. She fairly submitted that Departmental Enquiry is still pending, however, even after lapse of 90 days Respondent No. 3 who put the petitioner under suspension has not reviewed the order of suspension as observed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Ajay Kumar Chaudhary vs. Union of India, reported in (2015) 7 SCC 291. Aggrieved by the inaction of Respondent no. 3 of not reviewing the order of suspension, petitioner submitted a representation on 15/2/2023, however, till date the said representation is also not decided, therefore, direction be issued to Respondent no. 3 to decide the pending representation of petitioner at the earliest.

(3.) Learned State counsel opposes the submission of counsel for petitioner and submits that as the petitioner is facing departmental enquiry, he has been put under suspension. She however submits that as the petitioner is not pressing this writ petition on merits and only seeking direction to be issued to Respondent no. 3 to decide the pending representation, she is having no objection.