D. Srinivasa Rao vs. The State Of Telangana

Held

The Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the respondents to review the suspension order dated May 24, 2017, strictly in accordance with the guidelines stipulated in G.O.Ms.No.526, dated August 19, 2008. The respondents were instructed to pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. The Court did not make any specific findings on the legality or arbitrariness of the original suspension order or the subsequent refusal to revoke it, but rather focused on ensuring a timely review as per the government order. The ratio decidendi is that suspension orders should be subject to periodic review as mandated by administrative instructions, and failure to do so warrants judicial intervention to direct such a review.

Facts

The petitioner, a Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (now Joint Commissioner, State GST), was placed under suspension on May 24, 2017, following his arrest and detention for over 48 hours in connection with a criminal case registered under Sections 406, 420, and 468 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner's grievance was that despite the passage of approximately one year, the respondents had not taken steps to revoke his suspension and, in fact, declined to do so through an order dated July 3, 2018. The petitioner sought the revocation of his suspension and reinstatement with consequential benefits.

Key Issues

1. Whether the continued suspension of the petitioner, after a period of approximately one year without review, is illegal, arbitrary, and contrary to law, particularly in light of G.O.Ms.No.526, dated 19.08.2008? (Question of law and fact). Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the respondents had failed to review his suspension order for nearly a year and had declined to revoke it, which was contrary to the principles of natural justice and the guidelines laid down in G.O.Ms.No.526, dated 19.08.2008. He sought directions for the review of the suspension order and his reinstatement with all consequential benefits. Revenue's contention: The learned Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes submitted that the petitioner's case would be considered and appropriate orders would be passed by reviewing the suspension order in terms of G.O.Ms.No.526, dated 19.08.2008.