Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 31343 (JHR)

SAROJ KUMAR SINGH v. STATE OF JHARKHAND THRO THE CHIEF SECRETARY, DEPT OF PERSONNEL, ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS

WPC/761/2025 · 2025-08-19

Sri Ananda Sen

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:JHHC:24203 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 761 of 2025 ----- Saroj Kumar Singh, S/o Ganesh Singh, R/o At Janta Talkies, Bhurkunda P.O. Bhurkunda, P.S. Ramgarh, District Ramgarh, Jharkhand ------ Petitioner(s) Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary, Department of Personnel, Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha Department, Project Building, Dhurwa, Jagarnathpur, Ranchi 2.The Chairman University Grant Commission, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, P.O. & P.S. Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi 3.The Director, Higher Education and Technical Department, Government of Jharkhand 4.The Principal Secretary, Higher Education and Technical Department, Government of Jharkhand 5.The Vide-Chancellor, Vinoba Bhave University, Sindoor, Ichak, Hazaribagh 6.The Registrar, Vinoba Bhave University, Sindoor, Ichak, Hazaribagh 7.The Inspector General of Registration through its Registrar office at Ground Floor, Project Building Dhurwa, Jagarnathpur, Ranchi 8.The Officer-in-Charge, Bhurkunda, Patratu, Ramgarh 9.The Branch Manager, Bank of Baroda, Bhurkunda, Patratu, Ramgarh 10.The Principal, J.M. College, Bhurkunda, Patratu, Ramgarh 11.The Governing Body, J.M. College, Bhurkunda, Patratu, Ramgarh 12.Mukul Narayan Deo, the then Vice Chancellor, Vinoba Bhave University, Hazaribagh 13.Banshi Dhar Rukhaiyar the then Registrar, Vinoba Bhave University, Hazaribagh 14.Mithilesh Kumar Singh (Proctor, Vinoba Bhave University, Hazaribagh), Hazaribagh 15.Vidyanand Tiwary the then Principal, J.M. College, Bhurkunda, Patratu, Ramgarh 16.Dr. Balbir Singh Sidhu (the then University representative, now retired) Vinoba Bhave University, Hazaribagh 17.Leela Singh the then Principal, J.M. College, Bhurkunda, Patratu, Ramgarh 18.Deepak Kumar Jha Accountant J.M. College, Bhurkunda, Paatratu, Ramgarh 19.Gyanendra Prasad Dubey, (Bursar) J.M. College, Bhurkunda, Patratu, Ramgarh Giridhar Pathak 20.Bakshi Om Prakash Sinha (University Representative-cum-Secretary nominated by Vinoba Bhave University, Hazaribagh) J.M. College, Bhurkunda, Patratu, Ramgarh 21.Arvind Singh, the then Teacher Representative, J.M. College, Bhurkunda, Patratu, Ramgarh Giridhar Pathak 22.Shiv Shankar Singh (teacher), J.M. College, Bhurkunda, Patratu, Ramgarh Giridhar Pathak 23.Manoj Kumar Singh (teacher), J.M. College, Bhurkunda, Patratu, Ramgarh Giridhar Pathak 24.Vijay Kumar Mishra, (teacher), J.M. College, Bhurkunda, Patratu, Ramgarh Giridhar Pathak ------ Respondent(s) …… CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ranjan Kumar, Advocate For the State : Ms. Pinky Tiwary, AC to A.G. For the Resp. No.2 : Mr. Prasenjit Mahato, Advocate For the Resp. Nos.5 & 6 : Mr. Amaresh Kumar, Advocate …...... 07 / 19.08.2025: Heard, the learned counsel for the parties. 2. Petitioner has challenged his order of suspension dated 18.07.2022 contained in Letter No.JMC/53/2022. 3. It is the contention of the petitioner that on fake allegation, the petitioner who was a Class-IV employee has been suspended. 4. On the last date, the Vinoba Bhave University was directed to inform this Court about the status of the departmental proceeding, if any. 5. Today, the learned counsel submits that the college has not initiated any departmental proceeding against the petitioner as yet, however, the University had directed them to take appropriate action. 6. From the submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Vinoba Bhave University it is quite clear that even after expiry of nearly three years, G.M. College, Bhurkunda, the college affiliated by Vinoba Bhave University has not yet initiated a departmental proceeding and kept the petitioner in suspension for three long years. An employee cannot be kept suspended for indefinite period, that too, without initiating any departmental proceeding. 7. Considering the length of the suspension and the fact that till date no departmental proceeding has been initiated, the impugned order of suspension dated 18.07.2022 is quashed. The college will be at liberty to initiate a departmental proceeding against the petitioner and proceed in accordance with law, I have not gone into the merit of this case. 8. The payment of the salary or other benefits of the petitioner during this period will be decided by appropriate authority i.e. the Governing body of the College. 9. With the aforesaid observation, the instant writ petition stands disposed of. (ANANDA SEN, J.) R.S.