STATE AND ANR Vs. MUKTA SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Caveat No.2089/2018

(2.) It will be seen from the above provision that the Government servant could be placed under suspension, where (a) either an enquiry into his conduct is contemplated or an enquiry is pending, or (b) a complaint against him of any criminal offence is under investigation or trial. In the present case, Rule 31 (a) is relevant and that itself indicates two alternative situations, that is, where an enquiry is contemplated or is pending. It is evident that both cannot exist at the same time. It is for this reason that we say that the suspension order is not correctly worded.

(3.) Be that as it may, one of the main reasons why the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition and quashed the suspension order was that despite the fact that the suspension order was issued on 17.06.2016, no show cause notice or enquiry had been initiated till the date on which the judgment was delivered, that is, 22.12.2017. In fact, till date, no charge-sheet or even a show cause notice has been issued. However, pursuant to the impugned judgment, since the suspension order had been quashed, she has been reinstated on 19.02.2018.