a^w^_ IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR fCHHATTISGARH) WRIT PETITIONfSl N0.^35$'/2010. (S.B.) PETITIQNER: Jagarnath Sai Paikra, son of Peelu Sai, aged about aged about 37 years, working as Asst. Gram Panchayat Officer (Panchayat Secretary) of Gram Panchayat Ankira, Tahsil Farsabahar, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. versus Respondents ..•^ ^K ^M^ <^ A\.. /y^y' ^:/-" ^^^ 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary Department of Panchayat and Social welfare, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2. Collector, (Panchayat), District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. 3. Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Farsabahar, Tahsil Farsabahar, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ^ -HC—78 ^n^T^Tf^fNT ^T^T ^TT^T^TW DyypL' ^ *11*1Cfll ^HI^ ^oEf ^jj^j^^ ^tl1<-{^(o, [®j<rlH^< ^-»....y.£.^)..v^.'.s55^110. "^ 200 3Tf^T T^R7 (^^q^T) ^RTTW^tcT ^^ SB: HQn'bie Shri Manindra Moh 16-07-2010 <=hI^t<vl4lT1 'RTRT^* ^* fex2t iFsi^K "^^tRw^n^T lin ShTivastava737 Shri CJ.K-Rao, counsei for^he petitioner. 1, Shri Bhaskar Payasi, Pan^i Lawyer for the State/respondents No.1 and2. Submission of iearned coui order dated 17/06/2010 passed b} Coiiector couid not exercise powe authorifry nor the authority upon wi the authority to whom power of exercise power of suspension Sn n in ali departments of Govemment Sn view of the above subml this petition when there exists, ar^ iseS for the petitioner is that the impugned the Coliector is without jurisdjctfon as the r of suspension as he is neither appointing lom appointing authority is subordinate nor suspension has been conferred by any generai or special order as ref^rred to in RuSe 9 of C.G CMI Services (Ciassification, Controi & Appeai) ij^uies, 1966. On the other hand, submis|sjon of tearned counsei for respondents is that the Coilector has been spe^ifscalSy empowered by the Govemment to ^spect of Class-SII and Ciass-IV emptoyees ^xcept Police department. ^sions made, 1 am not inclined to entertain efRcacious aiternative statutory remedy of fiiing statutory appeal against t^e order of suspension. This petition is therefore dismissed resemng iib^ remedy against order of suspens) petitioner within 45 days from to^ without consjdering any objection rty to the petitloner to prefer departmentai w. if departmental appeai is fited by the ay, the same shail be decided on merits flth regard to limitation. ___- —draMssbrivastava