✦ Andhra Pradesh High Court · 08 Aug 2008

Writ Petition No. 17290 of 2008 · Andhra Pradesh High Court

Writ Petition No. 17290 of 2008L NARASIMHA REDDY2 min read

Case at a glance

Decided
08 Aug 2008
Bench
L NARASIMHA REDDY

Outcome

Disposed of

Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of, leaving it open to the petitioner, to make a

Provisions considered

Judgment

months from the date of suspension. Petitioner feels aggrieved by the order dated

Operative part

4.7.2008. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. It is not a dispute that the petitioner was in judicial custody, in connection with a criminal case registered under Section 302 read with 34 IPC. Though he was released at a subsequent point of time, the service regulations of the respondents mandate that in such an event, an employee must be placed under suspension. The question as to whether the suspension of this nature must be continued, till the conclusion of the proceedings before the criminal court, or whether the employer had any discretion to revoke the suspension, would depend upon the purport of the rules governing the matter. The petitioner is not able to place any material before this court, that warrant revocation of suspension, even while the criminal case is pending. It may be true that in case, the charges in the criminal case do not relate to the discharge of duties of an employee, it may not be in the interest of the employer, to continue the employee under prolonged suspension. Much, however, would depend upon the text of the relevant rules, as well as the nature of discretion that has to be exercised by the employer. Normally, the matters of this nature are reviewed, after completion of one year, from the date of order of suspension. By that time, the formalities, such as, filing of charge sheet, or any consequential departmental proceedings, would emerge. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of, leaving it open to the petitioner, to make a representation, after expiry of one year from the date of suspension, duly mentioning the provisions that govern the situation. As and when such representation is made, the 1st respondent shall dispose of the same, on its own merits. There shall be no order as to costs. PAN _________________ 8th August 2008

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of, leaving it open to the petitioner, to make a

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 34, 302.

Which court decided this case, and when?

Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 08 Aug 2008. The bench was L NARASIMHA REDDY.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Andhra Pradesh High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Writ Petition No. 17290 of 2008). ← Search more judgments