Suspension based on accusations against employee's father deemed unjust; court orders reinstatement
In a significant judgment, the Jammu and Kashmir High Court has quashed the suspension order of Ishant Sharma, a government employee, which was based on accusations against his father. The court ruled that penal acts of an accused do not pass on to their legal heirs, emphasizing the importance of direct culpability in disciplinary actions against employees.
The case revolved around an order issued by the Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly Secretariat, which suspended Ishant Sharma from his position following accusations against his father in an FIR. The FIR No. 32/2015, registered under the J&K Prevention of Corruption Act, accused Sharma's father, Kewal Krishan Sharma, of corrupt practices. Despite the serious allegations against his father, Ishant Sharma maintained a clean record in his professional duties since his appointment in 2014.
In the writ petition, Ishant Sharma contended that his suspension lacked any direct connection to his conduct as a government employee. He argued that the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1956, which govern suspensions, did not justify the action taken against him. The court noted that the FIR against his father could not be used to implicate Sharma in any wrongdoing, particularly when there was no evidence of misconduct on his part.
Justice Rahul Bharti, presiding over the case, highlighted the principle that criminal acts of a parent do not translate into culpability for their children in the eyes of the law. The court found the suspension order to be without merit, citing its lack of reasoning and the absence of any direct allegations against Ishant Sharma. The court further criticized the delay in executing the suspension, which occurred six years after the registration of the FIR against his father.
The court ordered the immediate restoration of Ishant Sharma's service, emphasizing the need for fair treatment in disciplinary proceedings. This judgment serves as a reminder of the foundational legal principle that individuals cannot be penalized for the actions of their relatives unless their own conduct is directly in question.
Bottom Line:
Suspension of a government employee cannot be based on accusations against a family member unless directly related to the employee's conduct or performance of duties.
Statutory provision(s): Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1956, J&K Prevention of Corruption Act, 2006
Ishant Sharma v. UT of J&K, (Jammu And Kashmir) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2840630
