IMIS^J^ h(pMk 9ZZ »>^2.<M(> PJr^lft Kbbjlh 2^ (•lt-&) Ihl^ ^VtJnUn—U^g 'Plrklh, ^!<fcJ^J£ IKl^ &nl3M^|Ct>y 'g ("Ijt.'fi) lhIb.-X|j»|tMln—IPlnJ lhll2.—N|jrltMln '^i<t>te}ift mi^ ii*>inj 'z ('lt'fi) ^hlN—ll^l^j •>^l> ^fcJA •Kbb-^:^ lrlk.y l^iy P'?t>P» bbjl^ -i^L& l-^llfc °>lr^(p^<R •|. SlNaONOJS^I isia-nj ('lt'fi) Ihl^ ^IJrlnlln -IJ^Jt^ '°)|rhlh &nlS»^l<t>y '^^ki^ IPIh 4>kjtelK h^bl^ll^ '<t>0lh i*U3ji ^u^ kL^LS. '^. ii^y '^ 99 IdAld^ &£^ ^U^ Mk^i b[l-y : (•a-S)600Z/ ^^f5'°N^ 'd-AA 1n1rl!*11i>1MF ....-••••••^ ..•<^'^ ..^'^9-^ ^^ ^r^ ^iaNOiiiiad jUibi*aiyin ('lt'B) A»ii)3^19ir»ipinhixiihinu inp i»ipwh s^ -/^\c^ ^,-^ ^ , HlGH COURT OF CHHATTiSGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETITSON (S) N0. 5366 OF 2009 PETiTIONER RESPONDENTS Vinod Kumar Sahu Versus State otChhatt'isgarh & Others (Writ Petition under Articte 226 of the Constitution of Indla) • Single Bench : Hon-'bie Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Shri N.K. Chatterjee, counse! for the petltloner. Shn V.V.S. Murthy, Dy. Adv. General for the State. (ORAD (Passed on thls 17th day of March, 2010) 1. VVith the consent of learned counsel appearing for the partles, the petitlon is heard finaily. 2. ' Learned counsei appearing for the petitioner submits that apart from mentioning of wrong provlsions in. the impugned suspension order dated 26-8-2009 (Annexure - P/1) passed by the Djstrict Education Officer, Janjgir-Champa, in respect of the, petltloner, more than 45 days have been passed from the date of piacing the petltioner under suspension, no charge sheet has been Issued as per the provisions contained under Ru!e 9 of the Chhattisgarh CiviS Servlces (Ciasslfication, Controi and Appeal) Rules, 1966 (for short "the Rules, 1985"). Therefore, the suspenslon order cannot contlnue for more than 45/90 days, as the case may be; If the charge sheet has not been issued. ^~>< ^t 3. S have heard learned counse! appearing for the parties, perused the pieadings and the documents appended thereto. There is no dispute that no charge sheet has been issued to the petitioner wjthln the aforesaid sfipulated period i.e. 45 days. The suspension order was stayed by this Court vide order dated 18-9-2009. 4. S.yb-ruies (2-a) and (2-b) of Rute 9 of the RuSes, 1966 read as under; if(2-a). Wher'e a Government servant is pjaced under suspenslon under clause (a)of sub- ru!e (1), the order of suspension shaii contain the reasons for msking such order and where It js proposed to hoid an enquiry against such Government servant under rule 1 4, a copy of the ' artlcles of charges, the statement of Imputations of mlsconduct or misbehavjour and a IIst of documents and witnesses by which each article of charge Is proposed to bs. sustained shai! &e Issued or caused to be issued by the dlscjplinary authorlty to such Government servant as requlred by sub-ruie (4) of RuSe 14, wlthin a period of 45 ' days from the date of order of suspensfon: Provlded that where the dlsciplinary authority is the State Government, the copy of charges and other documents mentioned above shal! be issued or caused to be issued.to. such Government servant within a period of 90 days from the of order of suspension. (2-b) Where the disciplinsry authority fails to issue to the Government servant, a copy of the charges and other documents referred to in sub- ruie (2-a) wjthin the period of 45 days, the disclpllnary authority shall, before expiry of the period, obtain orders jn writlng of the State Government for extension of the sald period of suspension: Provided that the .period of suspenslon shail in no case be enhanced beyond a period of 90 days from the date of the order of suspensson." t 5. !t is crystai ciear from perusai of the provisjons of sub-rules (2-a) and (2-b) of Rule 9 of the Ruies, 1966 that if the suspenslon order has been passed, the charge sheet has to be issued within a period of 45 days and In the suspension order passed by the State Government the period to Issue charge sheet is 90 da^. 3n the case on hand, no charge has been issued. 6. For the reasons mentioned hereinabove, the impugned suspension order dated 26-8-2009 (Annexure - P/1) stands revoked. However, having regard to the facts situation of the case, it js open to the respondent authorities to take appropriate steps, ifso adyised, in accordance withjaw. 7. in the result, the writ petition i.s ailowed to the extent indicated above. 8. There wii! be no order asto costs. -—-—- Gowri Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge ^