4^...** Ob .-.-""r-S^?-'-"" .. v^^'^^..-- Y ^^o-^:'%)fc ^^ c>) )^ ^^." . cy\) ?'"', ,...•-" IW;:;THEJIIGH_eOUHF OF JUDIGATURE. AI BILASPUR (CHHAI^IggAmi ^enei WRIT PgriTIOET No, 12- ^ ,Q£_2QQ6 PBTI'riOSEKt- Laxmi Prasad Tamrakar, son of •^ Sarikrishna Taarakar, aged about ?1 years, rssident ofH.I.G-15 C-1 colony, Subhas'fl H'agar, Korba(C.G) RSSPONDSI'CTS:- Ts. 1. State of Cflhattisgarhttnroagh Secretary, P.W.B. Department, Secretariat, D.K.Bflawan, Baipur (G.G) 2. Engineer-in-Cflief, P.W.D. Department, B.K.B'aawan, Haipur. 3. Ghief Engineer, P.W.B.Departiaeat, Bilaspur. 4. Sxeeutive Engineer, P.W.D. Bepartment, P.W.B. colony, Eampur, Korba (G.G). WK'T PETinOHJJEnER ARTIGLS 226/227 0? THg CQHSTITroigN_0?,_ITOIA. --s-i] '^ HiGH COURT OF CHHATTiSGARH AT BILASPUR SINGLE BENCH : HON'BLE MR. SATiSH K. AGNJHOTRI, J, !TPETmQNNQ.1260s21 Petitioner Respondents versus Laxmi Prasad Tamrakar State of Chhattisgarh and others Present : Dr. Shailesh Ahuja, counse! for the petltioner. / Mr. V.V.S.Moorthy, Deputy Advocate General with Ms. Sunita Jain, Pane! Lawyer for the respondents/State. (Passed on 12th Day'ofDecember, 2006) The petitioner, whi!e working on the post of.Sub-Engineer in the Publte Works Department, was suspended by order dated 27-8- 2005 (Annexure P-4) for serious financtal irreguiarity in contemplation of departrnenta! enquiry. The petittoner was issued a charge-sheet on 28- 11-2005 (Annexure P-5), according to the petitioner, S4 day, when, under Rule 9 of ihe Madhya Pradesh/Chhattisgarh Civii Ssrvices (Ciassification, Control and Appeal) Ruies, 1966, the charge-sheet has to be tesued within a period of90 days. 2. The petifioner has filed this petition seeking quashing of the suspension order dated 27-8-2005 (Annexure P-4) on the ground that the charge-shset was issued with 4 days' delay from the prescribsd period. w 3. The deiay of 4 days may not be fatal or may not prejudice the case of the petitionsr at this stage. The petitioner is at iiberty to rafee this objection in She departmentai enquiry, ifso advised. 4. Thus, ths suspenston order cannot be quashed on the ground of 4 days' deiay. '•^01 5. Lsarned counse! appearing for the petitioner further submits that the respondsnts - authorities may do we!i in compieting the enquiry expeditiousiy. 6. The petition is accordingly disposed of with ihe above- stated observation. Sd/- S.K. Agnihotri Judge Oopa!