2025:JHHC:34826 THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No.6601 of 2025 ----- Dhiraj Nishad, S/o Rajbali Nishad, R/o Qtr. No.130, Karmik Nagar Colony, Damodarpur, Dhanbad, P.O. P.S. Dhanbad, District- Dhanbad .... Petitioner(s). Versus 1.Bharat Coking Coal Ltd (BCCL), a subsidiary of Coal India Ltd, having its Head Office at “Koyla Bhawan, Koyla Nagar, P.O. & P.S. Seraidhela, District- Dhanbad through its Managing Director 2.General Manager, Basta Kolla Area, Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. P.O. and P.S. Dhansar, District Dhanbad 3.Project Officer, Basta Kolla Area, Bharat Coking Coal Ltd, P.O. & P.S. Dhansar, District- Dhanbad … Respondent(s) ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashim Kr. Sahani, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Kr. Das, Advocate Ms. Swati Shalini, Advocate …...... 02/ 21.11.2025: Heard, learned counsel for the parties. 2. In this writ petition, petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “That by means of this application the petitioner prays for grant of a writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ (s)/order(s) for quashing the Impugned Suspension order issued under Memo No: 775 dated 19.06.2025(Annexure-1) by respondent No:3 whereby the petitioner has been put under suspension as also for quashing Charge-sheet issued under Memo No: 1283 dated 01.11.2025(Annexure-2) by the respondent No:3; And/Or For issuance of any such Writ/Order/Direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and for doing conscionable justice to the Petitioner. 3. The petitioner is challenging the order by which he is put under suspension and also the order by which a departmental charge-sheet has been filed against the petitioner. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the charge against the petitioner in the departmental proceeding is the same as that of the charge in the criminal case, thus the charge-sheet in the departmental proceeding be quashed and the suspension order be also quashed. 5. After hearing the parties, I find that there is allegation against the petitioner that he was caught red handed while accepting bribe in the office. A criminal case was instituted. The petitioner was thereafter put under suspension and a departmental proceeding has also been initiated by issuing a departmental charge-sheet to the petitioner. 6. Once a misconduct is committed by the employee, it is open to the employer to initiate a departmental proceeding against him. There is no illegality in initiating a departmental proceeding, even if the charge is same and similar to the criminal proceeding. 7. Further it is the prerogative of the employer in the interest of the company to put an employee under suspension pending a departmental proceeding. 8. There is no allegation that the person who suspended the petitioner, did not have jurisdiction to do so, nor it is the case that the suspension is by way of a punishment. The suspension and the pending departmental proceeding are in the interest of the company. Thus, I find no ground to interfere in the order of suspension, and to interference with the charge-sheet which has been issued against the petitioner. 9. Accordingly, this instant writ petition stands dismissed. (ANANDA SEN, J.) 21st November, 2025 R.S./Sandeep