BEFO§E THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHATTISGARH‘ AT BILASPUR .w.P.(S) No.3$03 ( 2008 / Smt.Nisha Sahu, W/o Shri B.R.Sahu, Aged about 47 years, R/o Senior MIG — 228, Vijeta Complex, New Rajendra Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) PETITIONER VERSUS RESPONDENTS : 1) V“ State of Chhattisgarh w Through the School RIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA \ W ‘ Department, D.K.S.Bhavan, Raipur (C.G.) Qi (¢_£’O . J f, ‘ 2) / , The District Education Officer, a”: ’ g$6 \ r, XM r [?\)$ Ralpur (C.G.) ' " W%§3..°W 3) K” The Block Education Officer, k % \ Dharsiwan, Raipur (C.G.) HGH COURT CF EHHA?T§8GA§H : SKASPUR § ‘ \ Smt. Nisha Sahu Versus 3tafe cf Chhait'isgam & Othars fWri€ Petificn under Articie 22$ 9f the Const§tuti0n 6f indéa} S§ngie Bench : Han‘b3e Shri $atish K. Agni’neti; J. Present :— Shri 9R. Paiankar, counsek fer the petitiener. Shri V.V.S. Murthy, Dy. Adv. €3énerai fcw the State. (Fayed 0r; zhis 17“ day of arch, 201G) 1. W§th the conseni of Seamed counsel appearing for {he parties, the petition is hear iinaily‘ Learned counsel appearing for the eet$i30ne submiis that apar mam meniiomng wreng prevésions in the ampugned suspension order ded 6-7-2608 (nnexure — Fim} passed by ihe District Education Officer; Rpua in veseect of the petttienert more than 45 days have been passed fmm the date 0f piecing the petitior under suspeneien, no charge she has been issued as per the provisions contained under Rate 9 of the Chhatiiegarh Civil 8ervices {Classification Contoi and Appeai) Ruies, 1956 (fer short “the Rules, 1966”}. Therefere, the suspension order cannoi: v \ continue for more than 45796 days, as the case may be; if 7 \ t‘ne charge sheet ‘nas not been issued \ \ £5” NRIT PETHWON £3? NO. 3gG9 OF 2008 ?ETIT§ONER RESPSNDENTS i' ORDER (GRAL) ‘ M d r t o? at A a§ ne et r k) 3. § have heard Seamed counsel appearing fer the parties} perused the pleadings arid the dccuments appenéed thereto. There is no dispute that no chaxge sheet has been éssued to the petitioner within the aforesaid stiputated period Le. 45 days. The suspension order was stayed by this Court vEde order dated 31 -7-2GG8. Sub-rutes (2-3) and (2-b} at Rute 9 0f the Ruies, 1966 read as under: "{2-a§. Where a Government servant is ptaced ureder suspensinn under ctause {a} ef sub— ruie (1}, the order at suspensicn shat; contain the reasens for making such cider and where it is proposed to hoid an enquiry against suoh 3overnment servant under ruie 14, a copy of the articies of charges, the statement ot imputations of misconduct or misbehaviour and a list of documents and witnesses by which each articie of charge is proposed to be sustained shaii be issued o? caused to be issued by the discipiinary authority to such Government sewant as required by sub-ruie (4) of Rule 14, within a period ot’ 45 days from the date of order of suspension: Provided that where the disciplinary authority is the State Government, the copy of charges and other documents mentioned above shaii be issued or caused to he issued to suoh Government servant within a period of 90 days from the date of order of suspension. i2-t3) Where the disoipiinary authority faiis to issue to the Government servant, a copy or the charges and other documents referred to in sub- ruie (2-a) within the period of 45 days, the discipiinary authority snail, before expiry oi the said period, obtain orders in writing of the state Government for extension of the said period of suspensron: i3rovided that the period of suspension shalt in no case be enhanced beyond a period of 9f} days from the date oi the order of susoension." @ (J1 Gowri §i is crysiaé clear from gerusal of the provisinns a?“ sub-ruies {2a} and (2b) at Ruae 9 cf the Ruies, 1966 that sf the suspension order has been passed, the charge sheet has to be issued withm a geriod of 45 days and in case the suspension order passed by ihe State Gsvea'nment the period to issue charge sheet is g0 days. an the case an hand. no charge has been issued. For the reasons mentioned hefeinabcve, ihe §mpugned suspenséon arder dated 61-2698 {Annexms — PJ’i G) stands mvoked. However, having regard to the facts siiuaiion of the case, ii is open to the respondent authorities to take appropriaie sieps, if so advised; in aooordanoe with iaw. iri the resuii, the writ petiiioh is aliowed to aihe exteni indicaied above. There wiii be no order asio costs. r ' 1;: 3d]- ' Satish K. Agnihwi ' Judge