MANOHAR SINGH CHAUHAN Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed the present petition being aggrieved by the order dtd. 11/9/2018; whereby the period of suspension has been treated as dies-non while punishing him by the stoppage of one increment with cumulative effect. The petitioner was working as a Secretary of Gram Panchayat and vide order dtd. 10/7/2017 he was placed under suspension in contemplation of departmental enquiry. After conducting the departmental enquiry vide impugned order dtd. 11/9/2018 the petitioner was imposed with the penalty of stoppage of one increment with cumulative effect and the period of suspension was as dies-non.

(2.) Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the petitioner has preferred a representation mainly on the ground that in similar facts and circumstances while closing the departmental enquiry the period of suspension has never been treated as dies-non. After filling the representation he waited for two years and now he has filed the present Writ Petition before this Court.

(3.) Learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State submits that the representation is still pending and the petitioner is also having remedy of appeal against the impugned order the Madhya Pradesh Panchayats (Appeal and Revision) Rules, 1995.