Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether suspension of a government employee can be continued indefinitely without service of a memorandum of charges or charge-sheet, and whether a time limit can be imposed on such suspension pending disciplinary action.
Analysis: Suspension pending inquiry is temporary and cannot be allowed to continue for an unreasonably long period. The Court drew support from the constitutional value of fair procedure and the principle of speedy adjudication, and analogised the limitation on pre-trial detention under the criminal procedure law to the need for restraint in prolonged suspension. It held that where no memorandum of charges or charge-sheet is served within a short, defined period, continuation of suspension becomes unjustified. If charges are served, any further extension must rest on a contemporaneous, reasoned order. The Court also held that the Government may take protective administrative measures such as transfer or restrictions on access to records instead of indefinite suspension.
Conclusion: Suspension should not ordinarily extend beyond three months without service of a memorandum of charges or charge-sheet, and any further extension after service of charges must be supported by reasons.
Ratio Decidendi: Prolonged suspension pending disciplinary proceedings is impermissible unless supported by contemporaneous reasons, and in the absence of a charge-sheet within three months the suspension must cease.