1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF THE MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 18..02..2011 CORAM THE HON'BLE Mr.M.Y.EQBAL, CHIEF JUSTICE and THE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE F.M.IBRAHIM KALIFULLA W.A.(MD) No.219 of 2011 A.Karunanidhi, S/o.Appavoo Vairavi, Village Administrative Officer, (Under Suspension), Sevalur Village,Manapparai Taluk, Tiruchirapalli District, ..Appellant/Writ Petitioner Vs. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tiruchirappalli District. ..Respondent PRAYER: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order of the learned single Judge dated 22.11.2010 passed in W.P.(MD) No.9671 of 2010. Prayer in W.P.(MD)No.9671 of 2010: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent revoke the order of suspension issue vide order dated 05.12.2004 in proceedings No.RC.No.A3/8423/2004 issued by the respondent and re instate the petitioner in service. For Appellants :: Mr.A.Karunanidhi, Petitioner-in-Person For Respondent :: Mr.R.Janakiramulu, Spl. G.P. JUDGEMENT The Hon'ble Chief Justice & F.M.Ibrahim Kalifulla, J. This appeal is directed against the common order dated 22.11.2010 passed in W.P.(MD)No.1878 of 2010 and other batch of writ petitions. 2. The appellant filed W.P.(MD)No.9671 of 2010 seeking a direction to the respondent to revoke the order of suspension issued against him. The said writ petition was dismissed by the learned single Judge. Against which the present writ appeal has been filed. 3. It appears that the appellant was put under suspension on the ground of taking bribe, and a case under Prevention of Corruption Act was instituted being Crime No.8 of 2004 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, Tiruchirappalli. The appellant earlier filed a writ petition being W.P.No.10116 of 2009 challenging his suspension order, which was allowed by the learned single Judge on 12.10.2009. Against the said order, the government preferred an appeal in W.A.No.121 of 2010, which was disposed of on 12.03.2010 with a direction to the Criminal Court to dispose of the pending criminal case against the appellant within a period https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of that order. The appellant appearing in person submits that till date the criminal case has not been concluded. 4. Having regard to the fact that the criminal case filed against the appellant under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act is still pending, the order of suspension cannot be revoked. However, again this Court directs the concerned trial Court, where the criminal case against the appellant is pending, to try and dispose of the same within a period of four months from today. It is a matter of great concern that although the case was instituted in the year 2004 till date the trial has not been concluded and the appellant is continuing under suspension. Hence, we direct that in the event the trial is not concluded within four months from today because of the inaction on the part of the prosecution the order of suspension shall stand revoked immediately for the reason that an employee cannot continue to remain under suspension for an indefinite period. However, it is also subject to the condition that the appellant shall co-operate with the trial. 5. This writ appeal is disposed of on the above terms. No costs. Sd/- Deputy Registrar(LA) /TRUE COPY/ Assistant Registrar To 1 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tiruchirappalli District. 2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance and Anticorruption, Trichy. 3.The Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anticorruption Trichy. 4.The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Trichy. 5.Do-Thro' The Principal Sessions Judge, Trichy. W.A.(MD) No.219 of 2011 18..02..2011 sm PA/03.03.2011/2P/6C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/