[2025:RJ-JP:39397] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14699/2025 Surendar Kumar Verma S/o Shri Prema Ram Verma, aged about 31 years, resident of Village-Chinchas, Tehsil Laxmangarh Dist. Sikar Raj. ----Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department, Rajasthan Secretariat Jaipur, Raj. 2. The Secretary To The Government And Commissioner, Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department, Secretariat, Jaipur Raj. 3. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Dholpur, Raj. 4. Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Laxmangarh, Sikar, Raj. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Naveen Dhuwan For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA Order 24/09/2025 1. It is stated that petitioner was placed under suspension vide order dated 30.07.2024 in contemplation of disciplinary inquiry. Although, charge-sheet was issued to the petitioner on 23.01.2024, yet till this date no Inquiry Officer has been appointed to enquire into the charges levelled against the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner is fully co-operating in the inquiry proceedings and has also submitted his reply to the charge-sheet. However, till this date, the respondents have not [2025:RJ-JP:39397] (2 of 2) [CW-14699/2025] reviewed the suspension order dated 30.07.2024, despite lapse of more than one year from the date of suspension of the petitioner. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment in the case of Ajay Kumar Choudhary Vs. Union of India & Anr. reported in (2015) 7 SCC 291, wherein languishing the issue with regard to suspension period for a long time has been taken quite seriously by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and directions were given to review the suspension order after three months from the date of issuance of such order. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. 4. In the aforesaid circumstances, as mentioned in the writ petition, where despite lapse of more than three months from the date of issuance of suspension order, till date Enquiry Officer has not been appointed, the respondents are under a legal obligation, in the light of judgment in the case of Ajay Kumar Choudhary (supra), to review the order of suspension. 5. Hence, the instant writ petition is disposed of with directions to the respondents to pass appropriate speaking order after reviewing the suspension order dated 30.07.2024. Necessary orders shall be passed within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of with the above directions. (ANAND SHARMA),J DIVYA /49