High Court of Chhattisgarh
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:19161 NAFR AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Digitally signed by AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Date: 2025.04.30 17:33:02 +0530 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 7884 of 2024 1 - Vijay Kumar Shrivastava S/o Late Shri Harishankar Shrivastava Aged About 52 Years R/o Ward No. 10, Shankarpara Ambagarh Chowki District Rajnandgaon Now Mohla-Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Director Directorate Of Chhattisgarh Public Instruction Indravati
Facts
Bhawan, Block-3, First Floor, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - District Education Officer District Mohla-Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki, Chhattisgarh For Petitioner(s)
Legal Reasoning
come up for hearing before this Court in an identical set of facts in WPS No. 3463/2010 which was decided on 10.07.2018. In the said judgment this Court had taken into consideration the aforesaid circular and the judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court while deciding the said writ petition. This Court, in paragraphs 7 to 10 in WPS No. 3463/2010 has held as under:- “7. It would be relevant at this juncture to refer paragraph 8 of the judgment of MP High Court in case of Y.S. Sachan (Supra) which is being reproduced herein as under : “8. So far as the salary for the period of suspension is concerned, the petitioner should be paid full salary. A minor penalty has been imposed upon the petitioner. The punishment is so light and therefore the petitioner could not be saddled with the heavier penalty of depriving him the salary for the suspension period. This part of
Arguments
: Mr. Ajay Shrivastava, Advocate. ... Respondent(s) For Respondents/State : Mr. Soumitra Kesharwani, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 28/04/2025 2 1. The limited grievance of petitioner in the present writ petitoin is the settlement of the dues payable to him during the period of suspension. 2. The facts of the case are that the petitioner is posted as Lecturer(LB) Govt Girls H. S School Ambagarh Chowki and was placed under suspension by order dated 17/6/2022. Subsequently the petitioner was also issued charge sheet for disciplinary proceeding under Rule14 of the Chhattisgarh Civil Service(Classification Control and Appeal) Rules 1966 on the alleged act of major misconduct. The disciplinary proceeding was concluded and final he was inflicted with a punishment of stoppage of one annual increment without cumulative effect vide order dated 14/11/2024 (P/3). That the respondent have also mentioned in above order that the above suspension period will be counted only for calculating pension purpose and thus he will be deprived from salary and other service benefit of above period and this is the part against which petitioner is aggrieved for. 3. The contention of the counsel for petitioner is that once when the disciplinary proceedings have been initiated under Rule-14 for an alleged act of major misconduct and the disciplinary proceedings results in the imposition of a minor punishment, for that intervening period during which the petitioner’s services were placed under suspension he would be entitled for all consequential benefits including the monetary benefits minus the subsistence allowance that he has already received. The reliance was placed upon the circular of the State Govt. in this regard dated 23.11.2010 supported 3 with a judgment of the Madhya Pradesh in the case of Y. S. SachanVs. State of MP reported in 2004 (1) MPHT22. 4. The issue raised by the petitioner in the present writ petition had
Decision
the impugned order is not a speaking order. No reasons have been assigned for depriving the petitioner of his salary for the suspension period. The Government of India has issued a circular dated 3-12-1985 stating there in that where departmental proceedings against a suspended employee for the imposition of a major penalty finally end with the imposition of a minor penalty, the suspension can be said to be wholly unjustified in terms of F.R. 54-B and the employee concerned should, therefore, be paid full pay and allowances for the period of suspension by passing a suitable order under 4 F.R. 54-B. The guideline issued by the Central Government for its employees is just and reasonable and it should be followed by the State Government and its instrumentality. The Jabalpur Development Authority is also such instrumentality and it will also be governed by such interpretation of Rule 54-B of the Fundamental Rules.” 8. The respondent-State of Chhattisgarh by a subsequent circular dated 23.11.2010 have adopted the same analogy wherein in paragraph 6 of the said circular it has been held as under: 6. मुख्य शाቜኌ(cid:8)(cid:9) हे(cid:9)ु संቜኌ(cid:8)(cid:14)(cid:9) वि(cid:16)भागीय जाँच में यवि(cid:24) वि(cid:25)सी वि(cid:26)लंवि(cid:28)(cid:9) शास(cid:25)ीय से(cid:16)(cid:25) पर जॉच उपरां(cid:9) लघु शाቜኌ(cid:8)(cid:9) ही अधि%रोविप(cid:9) (cid:25)ी जा(cid:9)ी है (cid:9)ो उस(cid:25)ा वि(cid:26)लं(cid:28)(cid:26) औधिचत्यपू्ቓ, (cid:26)ही मा(cid:26)ा जा स(cid:25)(cid:9)ा। अ(cid:9)ः राज्य शास(cid:26) (cid:26)े वि(cid:26)्ቓ,य लिलया है वि(cid:25) ऐसे मामलों में सं(cid:28)ंधि%(cid:9) शास(cid:25)ीय से(cid:16)(cid:25) (cid:25)ी वि(cid:26)लं(cid:28)(cid:26) अ(cid:16)धि% (cid:25)ो मूलभू(cid:9) वि(cid:26)यम -54- (cid:28)ी (cid:25)े परिर्ቚेቌኚय में (cid:25)(cid:9),व्य अ(cid:16)धि% मान्य (cid:25)र वि(cid:26)लं(cid:28)(cid:26) अ(cid:16)धि% (cid:25)े संपू्ቓ, (cid:16)े(cid:9)(cid:26)-भ्ቈे ( शास(cid:25)ीय से(cid:16)(cid:25) (cid:25)े वि(cid:26)लं(cid:28)(cid:26) अ(cid:16)धि% में भुग(cid:9)ा(cid:26) वि(cid:25)ए गए जी(cid:16)(cid:26) वि(cid:26)(cid:16)ा,ह भ्ቈे" " (cid:25)ी राशिश (cid:25)ा समायोज(cid:26) (cid:25)र) वि(cid:24)ए जाएं। यह वि(cid:26)्ቓ,य इस ्ሺाप(cid:26) (cid:25)े ्ቚ(cid:25)ाशिश(cid:9) हो(cid:26)े (cid:25)ी धि(cid:9)शि(cid:14) से लागू होगा (cid:9)(cid:14)ा जिज(cid:26) ्ቚ(cid:25)र्ቓों में वि(cid:26)्ቓ,य लिलया जा चु(cid:25)ा है, (cid:16)े पु(cid:26)ः (cid:26)ही खोले जाएंगे 9. When we compare the aforesaid circular of the State Govt. as also the judgment of MP High Court in case of Y.S. Sachan (Supra) to the facts of the present case, both squarely fits into the facts of the present case wherein proceeding against the present petitioner though was initiated for major misconduct, but ended without any punishment after conclusion of DE. Therefore, the petitioner would be entitled for all consequential reliefs for the period of 5 suspension between 13.01.2005 to 24.06.2006. 10. The writ petition accordingly stands allowed and disposed of. It is directed that the petitioner be granted entire relief which he was otherwise entitled for had he not been placed under suspension between 13.01.2005 to 24.06.2006. While granting the said relief, the respondents shall adjust the subsistence allowance that has already been paid to him.” 5. The said order was not further challenged by the respondents and has attained finality. 6. Given the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fact that the issue in the present writ petition also if not identical is similar in nature where the petitioner has subjected to disciplinary proceedings under Rule-14. However, the punishment was one which was a minor punishment. Thus, the said judgment of this Court rendered in WPS No. 3463/2010 shall be squarely applicable in the case of the petitioner also. The writ petition therefore deserves to be and is accordingly allowed. 7. The impugned order Annexure P/3 dated 14/11/2024 to the extent that the suspension period will only be counted for pension purpose is set aside and the respondent are directed to ensure that the petitioner is paid all consequential benefits from the date of suspension 17/6/2022 till the date of revocation on 14/11/2024, Let this order complied within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of Copy of order. 6 8. Needless to mention that so far as the imposition of minor punishment is concerned, the petitioner would be at liberty to assail the same in accordance with the service rules governing the field. SD/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Amardeep