Prolonged suspension must be periodically reviewed, with any extension supported by specific reasons.

The petitioner, a Project Officer (Development) posted at Zila Panchayat, Barwani, was suspended on 28 July 2025 following social-media allegations that he had demanded illegal gratification.

An inquiry by the Additional Collector recorded witness statements but could not verify the authenticity of the audio clip underlying the allegations.

An FIR was also registered, but the record did not disclose its subsequent progress.

The petitioner challenged the continued suspension, asserting that it had remained in force for more than a year without a conclusive finding or further action.

Whether the petitioner’s continued suspension, without further action or a reasoned review, warranted judicial intervention

Whether the suspension should be revoked or extended only after a review supported by specific reasons

In Ajay Kumar Choudhary v. Union of India, (2015) 7 SCC 291, the Supreme Court held that suspension—particularly before charges are formulated—is transitory and should ordinarily be of short duration.

An indeterminate suspension, or its renewal without contemporaneously recorded sound reasons, may become punitive; prolonged suspension and repeated renewals should therefore be subject to periodic review and reasoned justification.

The Court noted that the inquiry report did not verify the audio clip and that no subsequent action was apparent; the status of the FIR was also unclear.

Given that the petitioner had remained under suspension since 28 July 2025, the Court applied the principle that suspension is temporary and should not continue indefinitely without review and reasons.

Rather than itself determining whether the allegations justified suspension, it directed the competent respondent to reconsider the order and decide whether to revoke or extend it, recording specific reasons.