- Home
- /
- High Courts
- /
- High Court of J & K and Ladakh
- /
- Employee Cannot Be Indefinitely...
Employee Cannot Be Indefinitely Suspended On Corruption Allegations Without Any Departmental Proceedings: J&K High Court
Aleem Syeed
14 Feb 2025 12:30 PM
The Jammu and Kashmir High Court quashed the suspension order of the employee, stating that an employee cannot be suspended for an indefinite period. The court observed that the petitioner has remained under suspension for more than a year and that no departmental enquiry parallel to the filing of the charge sheet has been initiated by the respondents, which would be prejudiced...
The Jammu and Kashmir High Court quashed the suspension order of the employee, stating that an employee cannot be suspended for an indefinite period. The court observed that the petitioner has remained under suspension for more than a year and that no departmental enquiry parallel to the filing of the charge sheet has been initiated by the respondents, which would be prejudiced by the termination of the petitioner's suspension.
The court also took note of the fact that the petitioner is superannuating next month and said that the interest of the respondents could be adequately safeguarded by directing the petitioner's attachment instead of continuing his suspension.
A bench of Justice Javed Iqbal Wani was hearing the petition challenging the prolonged suspension of the petitioner. The court observed that "the main purpose of placing an employee under suspension by his employer is temporary and is not a permanent feature envisaged for the purposes of completing an enquiry or trial in respect of the conduct of an employee."
The court relied on Ajay Kumar Chowdhary v. Union of India through Secretary (2015), in which the court held that if the suspension is for an indeterminate period or if its renewal is not based on sound reasoning contemporaneously available on record, it would render the suspension punitive in nature.
BACKGROUND:
The petitioner was a revenue officer who was arrested for the allegations of Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act. The Petitioner was suspended based on these allegations, and the suspension continued for a year. The petitioner challenged his prolonged suspension as being in violation of the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court and also contended that the suspension order was not issued by a competent authority.
However, the court, after considering the peculiarities of the case, including the period of suspension being more than one year, the petitioner's superannuation being only one month away, and the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court, directed the quashing of the suspension order.
Thus the court disposed of the petition, directing the respondent to attach the petitioner to the office without assigning any duty until the period of his superannuation.
APPEARANCE:
Sunil Sethi, Sr. Advocate with
Rudra Sharma, Advocate For Petitioners
Vishal Sharma, DSGI for Respondent.
Case-Title: Ashok Kumar vs Union of India and Ors
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 36