1 2025:CGHC:40243 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1894 of 2023 Mukesh Kumar Sav S/o Shri Doaman Sav, Aged About 30 Years Than Posted As Sub - Engineer Nagar Panchayat, Bhairamgarh, District Bijapur, R/o House No. 384, Ayodhyapuri, Jailgaon, Korba, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Urban Administration And Development Department Of Chhattisgarh, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - The Director, Urban Administration And Development Department Of Chhattisgarh, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - The Collector, Bijapur, District : Bijapur, Chhattisgarh 4 - The Joint Director, Urban Administration And Development Department Of Chhattisgarh, Jagdalpur, District Jagdalpur, Chhattisgarh. 5 - The President / Chief Municipal Officer, Nagar Panchayat Bhairamgarh, District : Bijapur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Petitioner :- Mr. Ashutosh Trivedi, Advocate For State :- Mr. Ankur Kashyap, Dy. Govt. Advocate ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hon’ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad ALFIZA BAIG Digitally signed by ALFIZA BAIG Date: 2025.08.14 17:27:45 +0530 2 Order On Board 11.08.2025 1. The present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and by way of which the petitioner is seeking for the following reliefs:- 1. That, this Hon’ble Court may be kind enough to call for the records pertaining to the suspension of the petitioner by the respondents. 2. That, the impugned order dated 12.10.2023 passed by the respondent be set-aside/quashed. 3. That, the petition may kindly be allowed and the respondents be directed to reinstate the petitioner to the post he was before the suspension. 4. That, any other relief deemed to be %t sought by the Hon’ble Court in the interest of justice. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset submits that he has challenged the suspension order (Annexure P/1) passed on 12.10.2022, as, in the light of judgment passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Ajay Choudhary Vs. Union of India through its Secretary and another (2015), 7 SCC, 291 has held that suspension period cannot be extended up to 90 days or as the case may be. He also submits that the charge sheet is yet to be issued against the petitioner. The suspension order of the petitioner is bad in law and the same is liable to be quashed. 3. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 3 4. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties, perused the record with utmost circumspection. 5. Considering the overall aspects of the case, I do not find the present case as the fit case to interfere with the suspension order passed against the petitioner, however, according to the petitioner the charge- sheet is yet to be issued against him, but, considering the fact that a case relates to Corruption and departmental enquiry is contemplated against the petitioner, as such, the petitioner’s suspension order has rightly been passed by the respondents and the same is not required to be interfered with, at this stage 6. Accordingly, the present petition is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. No order as to cost(s). sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge alfiza