After Five Months Without Reasoned Extension, Karnataka HC Ends KKRTC Driver’s Suspension And Orders Lighter Duty Pending Medical Review

The petitioner, a driver-cum-conductor assigned to lighter duties, was suspended by the respondent Corporation on 16 June 2026.

By the time the petition was considered, he had remained suspended for nearly five months.

The Corporation issued a charge-sheet on 28 September 2026, more than three months after the suspension began; no reasoned order extending the suspension was produced.

The petitioner sought to quash the suspension and be restored to lighter duties.

Relying on Ajay Kumar Choudhary v. Union of India, Civil Appeal No. 1912/2015, decided 16 February 2015, the Court applied the principle that suspension should not ordinarily continue beyond three months if a memorandum of charges or charge-sheet has not been served within that period.

If charges are served, continuation of suspension requires a reasoned extension order.

The employer may, instead of continuing suspension, transfer the employee to another workplace to limit possible interference with the investigation.

The petition was brought under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution.

The charge-sheet was issued on 28 September 2026, after the three-month period following the 16 June 2026 suspension order, and the Corporation did not produce a reasoned order extending the suspension.

Its counsel acknowledged both facts.

Applying Ajay Kumar Choudhary, the Court found no basis for continuing the suspension.

It addressed the Corporation’s concern about the seriousness of the charges by directing that the petitioner be assigned lighter duties at a different place within the depot or division, rather than at the same location.

The lighter-duty arrangement was made subject to review by the Medical Board and its decision; until then, the petitioner was to continue in lighter duties at such other place.

The petition was disposed of accordingly.