Telangana High Court
K.Babu Rao vs The State Of Telangana on 11 July, 2022
Author: K. Lakshman
Bench: K. Lakshman
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN
WRIT PETITION No.28674 of 2022
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in continuing the petitioner under suspension since 09.07.2018 without reviewing the same and also not paying the suspension allowance thought the petitioner is entitled under F.R.53 of the Fundamental Rules, as illegal and arbitrary and for a consequential direction to the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service with all proposals made by the 2nd respondent.
2. Heard Sri S.Jagadish, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Services- III.
3. Vide proceedings dated 09.07.2018, the 2nd respondent has placed the petitioner under suspension with immediate effect on the ground that the petitioner herein has involved in a case in Crime No.280 of 2015 for the offences under Sections 406, 420, 468, 471 r/w 120-B of IPC. As per 2 G.O.Ms.No.86 dated 08.03.1994 and G.O.Ms.No.526 dated 19.08.2008, the employees who are under suspension for a period exceeding two years shall be reinstated pending finalization of the disciplinary cases/criminal cases against them. However, in exception cases, for example, where the charged Officers are not co-operating for completion of investigation/inquiry or when the inquiry/investigation could not be completed due to pendency of litigation, a Committee headed by the Secretary of the Administrative Department, Head of the Department concerned and an Official from the Anti Corruption Bureau (where the cases are emanated from Anti Corruption Bureau investigation), shall review the orders of suspension against the employees who are continued under suspension well before completion of two years of suspension and take a decision to continue such employees under suspension beyond two years, duly recording the reasons for such a decision. It is relevant to note that vide proceedings dated 01.08.2021, the 2nd respondent has requested the 1st respondent to review the case of the petitioner in terms of F.R.53 and communicate necessary orders for taking further action in the matter. Despite the 3 said request, the 1st respondent has not acted upon it. Therefore, the present writ petition.
4. As stated above, in the present case, the 2nd respondent has placed the petitioner under suspension vide proceedings dated 09.07.2018. According to the petitioner, the 1st respondent has not reviewed the said suspension even after the lapse of two years period. The petitioner herein had submitted two representations dated 18.05.2021 and 05.08.2021 to the 1st respondent with a request to review said orders and reinstate him into service by considering the above said two G.Os. According to Sri S.Jagadish, learned counsel for the petitioner, the respondents have not even paid suspension allowance to the petitioner as per his entitlement.
5. Learned Government Pleader for Services-II, on instructions, would submit that the 1st respondent shall consider the said representations submitted by the petitioner and also the case of the petitioner as per the above said two G.Os. and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. 4
6. In view of the above said submissions, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to consider the representations dated 18.05.2021 and 05.08.2021 submitted by the petitioner in terms of the above said two G.O.s and communicate the order to the petitioner herein. The 2nd respondent shall pay the suspension allowance to the petitioner herein as per his entitlement, if the same is not paid. The 1st respondent shall complete the said exercise within a period of four (04) weeks form the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending, shall stand closed.
__________________ K. LAKSHMAN, J 08.07.2022 dv