Prolonged suspension bad in law, says HC

Closing a petition moved by a Village Administrative Officer who sought to revoke his suspension pending for more than two years, Justice S M Subramaniam said, “Prolonged suspension would result in financial loss to the State exchequer. Payment of subsistence allowance for a longer period without extracting work is also undesirable. Contrarily, if the proceedings are unable to be concluded, then the authorities shall revoke the suspension order at a point and post the employee in a non-sensitive post till the conclusion of the criminal case as well as the departmental disciplinary proceedings.”

Drawing a distinction between disciplinary proceedings and criminal proceedings and making it clear that there was no bar in continuing departmental disciplinary proceedings during the pendency of the criminal case, Justice Subramaniam said if the relevant documents and materials were not available, then the authorities should take a decision to keep the departmental disciplinary proceedings in abeyance till the disposal of the criminal case. “In such circumstances, after the disposal of the criminal case, such authority is empowered to continue with the departmental disciplinary proceedings even if the criminal proceedings ended in acquittal.”

Further, elaborating that an order of acquittal would not automatically exonerate an employee from departmental disciplinary proceedings, Justice Subramaniam said to convict a public servant under the criminal court of law, a strict high standard of proof was required. “However, no such proof is required for punishing an employee under the Discipline and Appeal Rules. Preponderance of probabilities are enough to punish an employee.”

However, holding that it was for the authorities to consider all the facts and circumstances in the case before it and take a decision, Justice Subramaniam in his order stressed, “In all such circumstances, the competent authority must ensure that the order of suspension issued are periodically reviewed in the interest of public administration as well as taking note of the grievances of the delinquent officials also.”