HI6HCOURT OF CHHATTISeARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition fS) No. 2506 of 2007 Petjtionep Verais Smt. Uli Sahu W/o. Shri Laxmon Lal Sahu Aged dbout years Assistait Teacher, Primary Schoot Tuta, Block- Abhanpir, Distt.- Raipur (C.@.) 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Throu9h- The Secretary, Department of School Education, D.K.S. Bhowon, Roipur (C.6.) 2. Biock Educotion Officer, Abhanpur, bistt.- Raipur 3. Distriet Education Officer, Ralpur, Distt.- Raiptr (C.6.) 4. The Colteetor, Raipur Oistt.- Raipur (C.©.) Writ oetition under Ariieie 226 of the Csr»titutjonof Sidia Sirgle Bench: Hon'bte Mr. Justice Satish K. ^nihotr'l. Present: Mr. K.K. Dixit, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Sunito Jain, Pmel Lawyer for the State/respondents. ORbER Possed on 1st of May, 2007) 1. The petitioner, triiile working as Assistont Teacher in the ©ovemment Primary Sehool Tuta, Bloek- Abhanpur, Oistr-ict- Raipur was suspended vide order doted 7.4.2007 (Annexure P-1) for having committed misconduct f with senior officer. Learned eounsel appewing for the petitioner impigns the suspension order on the ground that without affording an opportunity to explain his conduct, the petitioner was placed under suspension. 2. The State/respondents, after StBpension order, has issued a diow couse notice, asto why the deportmental action be not initiated egcunst him for having committed olieged misconduct. : ^^^S^^SS^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^S^^^^^^i^^^ '^^'^f^K^^.....^,^':-'^^':^'-^'-^ ^••^ 1.v. \'" 3. It is well setl-led principle of law that under the pnwisions of the Rule 9 of the Madhya Pradesh Civil Services (Classification, Cwitrol and Appeal) Rules, 1966, that the Sovemment servant may be placed under suspension where a disciplinary proeeeding against him is contemplated or is pendirg, since the dwwcaise notiee hos already been issued. The suspension order I cannot be interfered at this stoge. 4. It is weil settled pr'inciple of law that the suspension is temporar^ and it does not invoive punishment with evil consequences. Susper^ion mems a temporory deprivation of the functions not amountirg to any reduction of his rank or his status. The empioyee under suspension continues to be a ©overnmentServant, he is not permitted to n'ork keeping in view pendency' of departmental enquiry to avoid undue influenee in the proceedings of the departmental enquiry and tikely tamperiry with on records. Since order impugned is not punitive in nature, it is not necessay to issue any shnv couse colling upon expianatitm of the petitioner before placing him under suspension. 5. This. petition has no merit. It is accordingly dismissed summa'ily'. SiAhssh Sd/- Satish K. Agnihorri Judge