Order Extending Employee's Suspension After Filing Of Charge-Sheet Must Record Reasons: Madhya Pradesh High Court

The bench comprising Justice Subodh Abhyankar made the observation by placing reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Ajay Kumar Choudhary v. Union of India & Anr.-

In view of the aforesaid, it is apparent that after filing of the charge-sheet, it is necessary for the respondents to pass a reasoned order for extension of his suspension. In view of the same, the petition is hereby disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to file a fresh representation along with all the relevant documents to the Commissioner, Indore Division, Indore (respondent No.4), who shall decide the same, in accordance with law, in the light of the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ajay Kumar Choudhary (supra) within a further period of four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. While deciding the representation of the petitioner, the respondent shall also take into consideration order dated 19.10.2020 (Annexure P/14) passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.1035/2020 (Ajmer Singh Dudwa v. The State of Madhya Pradesh & others).

Facts of the case were that the services of the Petitioner were suspended owing to a departmental inquiry pending against him. Later, the charge-sheet in the inquiry was filed but no order was passed revoking the period of his suspension. Aggrieved, the Petitioner moved the Court.

The Petitioner submitted before the Court that in light of the observations made by the Supreme Court in Ajay Kumar Choudhary case, the Respondent Authorities ought to have passed a well-reasoned order for extension of his suspension from services. He further placed reliance on the decision of the Court in Balmukund Gaud v. State of M.P. & Ors.. Thus, he prayed that the respondent authorities be directed to decide his representation in light of the jurisprudence laid down regarding the subject concerned.

Examining the submissions of parties and documents on record, the Court found merit in the arguments put forth by the Petitioner. Accordingly, it directed the Petitioner to make a fresh representation to the Respondent Authority with all the relevant documents. It further directed the Respondent Authority to decide the same within 4 weeks and in light of the decisions in the Ajay Kumar Choudhary case and in Balmukund Gaud. With the aforesaid observations, the petition was disposed of.