Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sharad Yadav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 14 February, 2017
WP-2247-2017
(SHARAD YADAV Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
14-02-2017
Shri Atul Choudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Swapnil Ganguly, learned Government Advocate for the petitioner.
In case, the petitioner has any grievance with regard to his suspension or provisional suspension and non-issuance of the charge-sheet even after a lapse of 20 days, he can very well bring these facts to the notice of the appellate authority exercising jurisdiction under Rule 23 of the Madhya Pradesh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) rules and as the appellate authority has jurisdiction to deal with the matter, we are not inclined to interfere into the matter.
Petitioner may file an appeal and in case any grievance still subsists after decision on the appeal, he may take recourse to the remedy available under law.
For the present, granting liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal under the Madhya Pradesh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, we dispose of this writ petition.
With the aforesaid, this writ petition stands disposed of.
(RAJENDRA MENON) (SMT. ANJULI PALO) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE nd