N T IGH CUR HTT SGARH AT BILASPUR w P (S) NO $086 /2o1 EITITIONER ‘ 1 ' / AL.Kanwar ‘ /o Sri §.S.1Kanwar,, r Ag6d j about 38 \ j ' year , Occupation — SerVice, Chiejf EXecutiiIe Of&ccr, JanPad w 'Panahayat Ba’ghbahera,. Dlstt. , l ~ Mah!asamund—(. VERSUS l , ESPONDENTS ’ 1. / State : of Cllhattisgarh r Through —‘v Th6 Secretary e ‘ ‘1 ’ " ‘ V Department of Panchayat and * Rural Development D K S Bhawan Ralpur Dlstt Ralpura (C G) Chlef Executwe Omcer Zlla, Panchayat Mahasamund D1stt Mahasamund (C G) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLES 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA / 2 W 1 HE H OT OF CHA o P S h C.G) R gg? JWRIT PETITION 3(8) NO.5086 OF 2010 Petitionér V ‘ A.L. KahWar Respondents . - State of Chhattisgarh & Another i (Writ Petition under Artlc|e 226 of the Constitution of India) ‘ Single Bench . Hon ble Shri Satlsh K. Agnlhotrl, J. Present-f Shri A.N. Pandey,'Advocate forthe petitioner. Shri A.V. Sridhar, Panel Lawyer for the Staten I ; . x Versus ' ‘ ORDER (ORAL) K i (Passed on this 14m day of January, 2011) The: petitioner aggrieved by the order datedt23/08/2010 (Annexur ' P/t) whereby the petitioner has been piaced under suspension on the ground that the petitioner has not com‘piied with the transfer order. wt Be that: as it may, Without going into the facts of the ease, where there is compliance of‘the order or not, thequestion involved in the ‘casEe asto whether suspension canbe ordered ‘by way of punishment 'under provisions of Rule 9(1) of the Chhattisgarh Civil Serviceis (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1966 (for short “theiRu/es, 1966"); Indisputably, there is no other provision except Rule 9 of the Rule 1966 which prOVides for placmg an, employee under suspensron There are only two conditions where an employee can be placed under suspension Rule 9(1) of the Rule 1966 prowdes for suspensmn in followmg cases — ' ' i l (a) l Where a disCIplinary proceeding against him ‘is contemplated or is pending or (b) E Where a case against him in respect of any criminal i offence is under investigation inquiry ortrial V l e On y,’ tr riinal e is pei r an cril quer whehe a cm cas ndng o y imna offeinée nas been fiied or ny other departmentai enduiry was contemplated or pending conS|deratlon Shn Sridhar learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State submit that no enqwry wa s o Sub-rule (2-a) of the Rule 9 of the Rules, 1966 prescribes for time imit for placing under suspension after the o! der of suspension is passed If the order is passed by other than the State Government employee cannot be placed under suspension for more than 45 days and if it is passed by the State Government the period is 90 days. . ub-rules (2—a) and (2-b).of Rule 9 of the Rules, 1966 read S - as under: contemplated against the petitioner. l “(Z-a). Where a Government servant is placed under suspension under clause (a) of sub- rule (1), the order of'suspension shallicontain the reasons for making such order and where it is ' péoposed to hold an enquiry against suc Government servant under rule 14 a copy of the articles of charges the statement of imputations of misconduct or misbehaVIour and a list of documents and Witnesses by which each article of charge is i proposed to be sustained shall be issued or caused a to be issued by the diSCipIinary authority to such Government servant as required by sub rule (4) of Rbie 14, Within a period of 45 days from the date of oi'der of suspension: Prowded that where the diSCiplinary authorty is the State Government the copy of charges and other documents mentioned above shall be issued or caused to be issued to such Government servant Within a period of 90 days from the date of order of suspension (2 b) Where the disciplinary authority fails to issue to the Government servant a copy of the charges and other documents referred to in sub- rule (2 a) Within the period of 45 days the d isCiplinary authority shaH before expiry of the said period obtain orders in writing of the State G p f overnment for extension of the said eriod o n suspensw é i l h i 3 PrOVIded that the period of suspenSIon shall In no case be enhanced beyond a penod of 90 days from the date of the order of suspenSIon 6. e impugned order was passed on 23/08/2010 thereafter, no Th enquiry or department enquiry has been initiated till date for more than 120 days. Even, if there was a contemplation of enquiry that cannotébe relied upon for sustaining the suspension order after 45 days o‘r 90 days, as the case may be; In view of foregoing, the impugned suspension order dated 23/08/2010 (Annexure P/1) placing thei petitioner under suspension without any departmental enquiry or without being criminal offence against the petitioner, is quashed. However, respondent authorities may take appropriate action, if so advised in accordance with law. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed to the above extent. 9. No order asto costs. it Sd/- T ’ satlsh K Agmhotn I Judge l t Arun -