WPS/7380/2009 of JEEVAN LAL BARMAN Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH and ORS. on 17 December 2009

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF CHHATTISGARHAT BILASPUR

The petitioner most humbly and respectfully begs to submitas under :

y

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR

Writ Petition (S) No. 7380 of 2009

PetitionerJeevan Lal BarmanVersusRespondentsState of Chhattisgarh and othersVersusRespondentsState of Chhattisgarh and others (Writ Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India)

(SB: Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri J.)

Shri U. R. Khosle, Advocate for the petitioner.Shri P. K. Bhaduri, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondents.

O R D E RtOralt

(Passed[on][ this][ 17th][ day][ ofDecember,][ 2009)]

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that thepetitioner, while working as Headmaster in Middle School,Bazar Para, Tahsil Baloda, District Janjgir Champa, was placedunder suspension by order dated 20.8.2007 (Annexure P/l)w.e.f. 3.4.2006, on the ground that he was confined to the jailcustody on 3.4.2006 in connection with the offence registered atCrime No. 127, punishable under Sections 409 and 420 of theIndian Penal Code. Learned counsel further submits that theconcerned authorities have not taken care to see that theadmissible subsistence allowance is payable to the petitionerduring suspension period.

On perusal of the papers appended to the writ petition it isapparentthatearlierthepetitionerhadflledW.P.No.4687/2005 but the petitioner has not made even a whisperabout the fate of the said writ petition, in the present writpetltion.

Rule9(2)(a)of theM.P./C.G.CivilServices(Classification,Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966 provides that "A Governmentservrant shall be deemed to have been placed under suspensionby an order of appointing authority (a) with effect from the dateof his detention, if he is detained in custody whether on acriminal charge or otherwise for a period exceeding forty-eighthours;?\ In the case on hand, admittedly, the petitioner was in "^.

6. Thakur.

custodymore than48hours.Thus,Idonotfmdanyirregularity or illegality in the impugned order dated 20.8.2007(Annexure P/l).

It is well settled principle of law that the suspension istemporary and it does not involve punishment withcivilconsequences. Suspension means a temporary deprivation ofthe functions not amounting to any reduction of rank or status.The employee under suspension continues to be a GovernmentServrant, he is not permitted to work keeping in view pendencyof criininal trial or departmental enquiry toavoid undueinfluence in the proceedings and likely tampering with onrecords.(See P.L.Shah Vs. Union of India and another1,Union of India atid others vs« B. G. Nambudiri2)

In view of the foregoing, there is no merit in this writ petition.The writ petition is dismissed, accordingly. No order asto costs.8o far as the prayer of the petitioner for grant of subsistenceallowance during suspension period is concerned, the petitionermay make a representation in this regard to the concernedauthority. It is expected that the concerned authority mayconsider anddecidetherepresentation,if any,within areasonable period, in accordance with law.

Sd/-SatishK.AgnihotriJudge