#subsistence allowance

The Allahabad High Court has ruled that a suspension order remains lawful even if the charge-sheet has not been served, provided the order clearly initiates a departmental enquiry and ensures expeditious disposal with subsistence allowance. This protects public servants from indefinite suspension while upholding administrative discipline, setting a critical precedent for departmental proceedings across state services.

Delhi High Court rules that failure to pay subsistence allowance during disciplinary proceedings does not automatically invalidate the inquiry unless the employee demonstrates concrete financial hardship that prevented participation. The judgment reinforces that procedural lapses must cause actual prejudice to warrant interference under service law.

Punjab & Haryana High Court rules that indefinite suspension without initiating departmental proceedings violates Rule 4(5)(b) of Punjab Civil Services Rules. The court mandated reinstatement and payment of arrears of subsistence allowance within six weeks, directing completion of proceedings within four months to prevent prejudice to the employee.

Calcutta High Court rules that suspended municipal employees under the WB Municipal Employees Rules, 2010, are entitled to subsistence allowance as a statutory right, regardless of the suspension's validity. The Court also invalidates disciplinary proceedings initiated by an authority lacking competence, reinforcing procedural safeguards in service law.

Tripura High Court holds that suspended government employees are entitled to provisional pension, leave encashment, and GPF payments based on their last drawn pay, not subsistence allowance. The court also imposes 7% interest for delayed disbursements, reinforcing strict compliance with pension rules and protecting employees' financial rights during suspension.

The Madras High Court ruled that employees suspended pending sexual harassment inquiries are entitled to subsistence allowance from the date of suspension, including arrears, until the inquiry concludes. The judgment reinforces that financial security is a fundamental aspect of natural justice, regardless of the allegations' gravity, impacting all suspended employees under service law.

Kerala High Court holds that suspension does not negate entitlement to subsistence allowance; non-employment certificate production and agricultural income do not disqualify payment.

CAT Hyderabad holds that suspension of a government servant lapses automatically if charge sheet is not issued within 90 days, reinforcing DOPT guidelines and Ajay Kumar Choudhary precedent.

Madhya Pradesh High Court holds that indefinite suspension of government employees pending unprogressed criminal trials violates natural justice and violates state policy.

Kerala High Court rules that co-operative societies cannot deduct amounts from subsistence allowance without statutory authority, affirming entitlement under Kerala Service Rules.

Chhattisgarh High Court holds that prolonged suspension without reasoned extension violates Article 21; subsistence allowance is a constitutional right even if termination follows.