Vinay Kumar Mishra vs State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others

Anand Pathak, J

1 . The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution has been preferred by the petitioner seeking following reliefs:-

"(i) A writ of mandamus may kindly be issued to Respondent No.1 and 2 directing them to take the decision on the representation of the Petitioner (Annexure- P/8, P/9, P/10 & P/11)

(ii) An appropriate writ may be issued directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for revocation of suspension in light of Circular dated 28.01.2013."

2 . It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that at the relevant point of time, he was working as Constable in Transport Department and posted at Check post Multai (District Baitul). On the basis of a criminal case registered against him at Police Station Umari, District Bhind in connection with Crime No.309/2020 for alleged offence under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC, he placed under suspension vide order dated 17/09/2020.

Grievance of Petitioner is that for last more than 3 years, he is kept under suspension and same has not been revoked. He relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Ajay Kumar Chaudhary Vs. Union of India & Anr. reported in 2015 (7) SCC 291 and submits that in line of the said spirit, Circular dated 28.01.2013 and many more such directions have been given by the State Government to consider the case of suspended employees periodically for revocation, so that if their cases are befitting revocation then they may be given the benefit of revocation otherwise they may be continued to be the under suspension. No departmental enquiry initiated against the petitioner so far.

Learned counsel for the respondent opposed the prayer and submits that the case of petitioner involved moral turpitude. Therefore, he is placed under suspension. However, he fairly submits that Authority concerned shall take note of the case as per law as and when Authority takes such cases for consideration.

5 . Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents appended thereto.

6 . This is a case where petitioner is placed under suspension since 17/09/2020. Allegations against the petitioner are in respect of offence under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 of IPC in which according to the concerned Authority consists of moral turpitude. However, looking to the mandate of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Ajay Kumar Chaudhary Vs. Union of India & Anr. reported in 2015 (7) SCC 291 and the very Circular dated 28.01.2013 (Annexure P/6), it appears that concerned committee has to take care of such exigencies where employees who are placed under suspension can be considered for further extension of suspension or revocation or based upon individual facts and circumstances of the case.

Therefore, without adverting on merits of the case, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to submit a certified copy of this order along-with relevant documents for refreshing the memory of respondents and on receipt of such documents, respondents shall place the case of petitioner under the relevant committee for consideration in accordance with law. It is expected that the respondents shall consider the same and decide by passing a reasoned order at an expeditious note.

Resultantly, this petition stands disposed of in above terms.