LAWS(CHH)-2018-7-106

PRAMOD SHUKLA S/O S/O LATE HETRAM SHUKLA Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH THROUGH SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF URBAN ADMINISTRATION

Decided On July 19, 2018
Pramod Shukla S/O S/O Late Hetram Shukla Appellant
V/S
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Urban Administration Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition, challenge is levied to the impugned order dated 13-11-2017 vide Annexure P-1 and impugned suspension order dated 24-5-2017 vide Annexure P-2.

(2.) It is admitted by the respondent No.1 that the petitioner was Chief Municipal Officer and posted at Municipal Council, Kumhari. He was put under suspension vide Annexure P-2 under Rule 36 of the Chhattisgarh Municipal Service (Executive) Rules, 1973 (in brevity, 'Rules of 1973'). He had submitted representations on 28-8-2017 and thereafter on 7-9-2017 vide Annexure P-4. He preferred writ petition before this Court bearing WPS No. 4802/2017 wherein an order Annexure P-5 dated 14.09.2017 was passed. The said writ petition was disposed of by order Annexure P-6 dated 10-10-2017 with a direction to the respondent No. 1 to consider revocation of the petitioner's suspension in view of the judicial pronouncement of the Supreme Court in the case of Ajay Kumar Choudhary -v- Union of India, (2015) 7 SCC 291 and take a decision within a period of 3 weeks. He again submitted a representation Annexure P-7 dated 26-10-2017. He preferred a Contempt Petition (C) No. 722/2017. The respondent No.1 further admitted that he had passed impugned order Annexure P-1. The said contempt proceeding was closed with liberty to the petitioner to challenge the Annexure P-1.

(3.) In brief, case of the petitioner is that the Rules of 1973 do not prescribe suspension period, when delinquent employee be reinstated, right of appeal. During the pendency of the aforesaid writ petition, the respondent No. 1 could not demonstrate whether any charge sheet is served upon him during the period of 90 days from the date of his suspension. No charge sheet was served upon him within a period of 90 days from the date of his suspension. He is at the verge of superannuation. His representation Annexure P-7 has not been decided in the light of the aforesaid judicial precedent laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ajay Kumar Choudhary .