• Proper legal guidance

It is a well settled legal position that the Government have an implied power to place a Govt. servant under suspension pending the completion of the departmental enquiry  and in other words the employer is regarded as issuing an order to the employee which, because the contract is subsisting. suspended Govt. servant is not entitled to an opportunity of explanation for the order of suspension. 

It has been held in D.N.Ganju v.State of J&K - (AIR 1964 J&K 14) that the High Court while exercising power in a writ cannot go into the question whether an order suspending a Govt. servant was or was not based on proper material.

Under such circumstance is there any provisions for those who are place under suspension due to ulterior motive.
Asked 3 years ago in Civil Law from Chandigarh, Chandigarh
The only scope for a government servant who claims to have been suspended due to an ulterior motive is to establish the said motive before the court. The chances of success are always very bleak.
Ashish Davessar
Advocate, Jaipur
18057 Answers
445 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
The scope of judicial review is limited in case of suspension for the reason that passing of suspension order is of an administrative nature and suspension is not a punishment. Its purpose is to only forbid the delinquent to work in the office and it is in the exclusive domain of the employer to revoke the suspension order. The Tribunal or the court cannot function as an appellate authority over the decision taken by the disciplinary authority in these regards.
In Jayrajbhai Jayantibhai Patel v. Anilbhai Nathubhai Patel & Ors., (2006) 8 SCC 200, this Court explained: "18. Having regard to it all, it is manifest that the power of judicial review may not be exercised unless the administrative decision is illogical or suffers from procedural impropriety or it shocks the conscience of the court in the sense that it is in defiance of logic or moral standards but no standardised formula, universally applicable to all cases, can be evolved. Each case has to be considered on its own facts, depending upon the authority that exercises the power, the source, the nature or scope of power and the indelible effects it generates in the operation of law or affects the individual or society.

Though judicial restraint, albeit self-recognised, is the order of the day, yet an administrative decision or action which is based on wholly irrelevant considerations or material; or excludes from consideration the relevant material; or it is so absurd that no reasonable person could have arrived at it on the given material, may be struck down. In other words, when a court is satisfied that there is an abuse or misuse of power, and its jurisdiction is invoked, it is incumbent on the court to intervene. It is nevertheless, trite that the scope of judicial review is limited to the deficiency in the decision-making process and not the decision."
Ajay Sethi
Advocate, Mumbai
23116 Answers
1214 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Proper material and biasedness are two different things one can go to CAT.
Anil Gupta
Advocate, New Delhi
180 Answers
41 Consultations
4.3 on 5.0

Ask a Lawyer

Get legal answers from top-rated lawyers in 1 hour. It's quick, easy, and anonymous!
Ask a Lawyer

Civil Lawyers

T Kalaiselvan
Advocate, Vellore
13919 Answers
127 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Ajay Sethi
Advocate, Mumbai
23116 Answers
1214 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Ashish Davessar
Advocate, Jaipur
18057 Answers
445 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Krishna Kishore Ganguly
Advocate, Kolkata
12043 Answers
228 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Nadeem Qureshi
Advocate, New Delhi
3517 Answers
129 Consultations
4.9 on 5.0
Rajgopalan Sripathi
Advocate, Hyderabad
869 Answers
43 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Atulay Nehra
Advocate, Noida
424 Answers
15 Consultations
4.7 on 5.0
Ajay N S
Advocate, Ernakulam
1905 Answers
19 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Shivendra Pratap Singh
Advocate, Lucknow
2729 Answers
41 Consultations
4.9 on 5.0
Thresiamma G. Mathew
Advocate, Mumbai
1316 Answers
85 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0