Jharkhand High Court
Shiv Kumar Verma vs State Of Jharkhand & Ors on 3 August, 2010
Author: Amareshwar Sahay
Bench: Amareshwar Sahay
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P. (S) No. 2317 of 2010
Shiv Kumar Verma ...PETITIONER
-V e r s u s -
The State of Jharkhand and others ... ... RESPONDENTS
...
CORAM: - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMARESHWAR SAHAY.
For the Petitioner : Mr. Anjani Kumar Verma, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Ms. Nehala Shramin, J.C. to Sr. S.C. - II
04/03.08.2010Heard the parties and with their consent this writ petition is being disposed of at this stage itself.
The grievance of the petitioner is that he was proceeded departmentally for the charges of disobedience, indiscipline etc. and thereafter, on conclusion of departmental inquiry, a report was submitted vide Annexure-8 on 03.09.2009 but the disciplinary authority has not taken any decision on the basis of the enquiry report and has kept the matter pending since 03.09.2009.
Further grievance of the petitioner is that at the one hand the petitioner is continuing under suspension and on the other hand, the disciplinary authority i.e. Civil Surgeon, Dumka has not taken any final decision in the matter till date.
A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents where it is stated that the enquiry report submitted by the enquiry officer is not complete and several other charges have to be framed by way of supplementary charge and therefore, the Deputy Commissioner has been requested to appoint another conducting officer for fresh enquiry.
Admittedly, the petitioner was suspended on 20.07.2009 and since then he is under suspension. If the respondents are intending to proceed against the petitioner departmentally or to take any action against him, they are free to do so after following the due procedure laid down under the law but the petitioner cannot be allowed to remain under suspension for an indefinite period for inaction on the part of the respondents.
In this view of the matter, the respondents are directed to revoke the suspension of the petitioner with immediate effect and thereafter they may proceed against him in accordance with law departmentally. It is made clear that if any departmental proceeding is initiated against the petitioner, the same be completed as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six months from the date of initiating the proceeding.
With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ petition stands disposed of.
(Amareshwar Sahay, J.) RC