HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3651/2022
Smt. Durga Choudhary W/o Shri Gajraj Jat, Aged About 34
Years, R/o Village- Post Gagera, Police Station Gulabpura, Tehsil
Hurda, District Bhilwara (Raj.) At Present Posted As An Patwari
At Deoli, District Tonk (Suspended).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary, De-
partment Of Revenue, Government Of Rajasthan, Secre-
tariat, Jaipur (Raj.).
2. The Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Government Of
Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
3. The District Collector, Tonk (Raj.)
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vinod Pathak For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH Order 10/03/2022
1. The matter pertains to suspension of the petitioner.
2. The Hon'ble Supreme court in the matter of Ajay Kumar Choud- hary Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors. Reported in 2015(7) Supreme Court Cases, 291 in para No.21 has held as under:-
"21. We, therefore, direct that the currency of a suspension order should not extend be- yond three months if within this period the memorandum of charges/charge-sheet is not served on the delinquent offi- cer/employee; if the memo- randum of charges/charge- sheet is served, a reasoned or- der must be passed for the ex- tension of the suspension. As (Downloaded on 15/03/2022 at 09:12:26 PM) (2 of 3) [CW-3651/2022] in the case in hand, the Gov- ernment is free to transfer the person concerned to any de- partment in any of its offices within or outside the State so as to sever any local or per- sonal contact that he may have and which he may mis- use for obstructing the investi- gation against him. The Gov- ernment may also prohibit him from contacting any person, or handling records and docu- ments till the stage of his hav- ing to prepare his defence. We think this will adquately safe- guard the universally recog- nised principle of human dig- nity and the right to a speedy trial and shall also preserve the interest of the Government in the prosecution. We recog- nise that the previous Consti- tution Benches have been re- luctant to quash proceedings on the grounds of delay, and to set time-limits to their dura- tion. However, the imposition of a limit on the period of sus- pension has not been dis- cussed in prior case law, and would not be contrary to the interests of justice. Further- more, the direction of the Cen- tral Vigilance Commission that pending a criminal investiga- tion, departmental proceedings are to be held in abeyance stands superseded in view of the stand adopted by us."
3. In view of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Ajay Kumar Choudhary Vs. Union of India (supra) and in view of Rule 13(5) of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classifi- cation, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1958, I deem it just and proper to direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for revocation of suspension within a period of 60 days by passing a speaking and reasoned order strictly in accordance with law. How- (Downloaded on 15/03/2022 at 09:12:26 PM)
(3 of 3) [CW-3651/2022] ever, the petitioner is at liberty to file fresh writ petition if need so arises.
4. Ordered accordingly. The writ petition is disposed of. The stay application, if any, also stands disposed of.
(INDERJEET SINGH),J JYOTI /223 (Downloaded on 15/03/2022 at 09:12:26 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)