P.SARAVANAN Vs. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petitioner was placed under suspension in proceeding dated 13.07.2016. The writ petitioner was placed under suspension on account of the fact that he had involved in a criminal offence investigated by the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Wing, Erode and a case was registered.

(2.) The writ petitioner was arrested and detained under custody for a period exceeding 48 hours. Thus, he was placed under suspension. The learned counsel for the writ petitioner states that the writ petitioner is unconnected with the allegations and his request for revocation of suspension order also had been rejected by the respondent in proceeding dated 05.04.2017.

(3.) Periodical review of the orders of suspension are also warranted. Order of suspensions are to be revoked taking note of the changed facts and circumstances and considering the status of the criminal case pending against the delinquent officials. All such facts and circumstances are to be considered while undertaking the process of review. In the case of the writ petitioner, while exercising the power of review, it is stated that the process for accord sanction for prosecution as against the writ petitioner by the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Department was pending. Therefore, the Authorities Competent refused to revoke the order of suspension, now almost two years lapsed and under these circumstances, the case of the writ petitioner to be reviewed further with reference to the changed circumstances.