Munna Lal vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others
2019 Latest Caselaw 5535 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 38
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10024 of 2019
 

 
Petitioner :- Munna Lal
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rohit Upadhyay
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.

Petitioner has approached this Court against the order dated 20th December 2017, passed by Sub-Divisional Officer (Sadar Agra) whereby petitioner has been placed under suspension. This order records that petitioner has not attended to his duties w.e.f. 28.11.2017 which has adversely affected recovery proceedings.

Perusal of the record would go to show that petitioner has been convicted for seven years in a criminal case under Sections 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act and Sections 120-B, 218, 409, 467, 468, 471, 477-A IPC. Petitioner has preferred a Criminal Appeal No. 7440 of 2017 wherein, he has been enlarged on bail vide order dated 30th July, 2018 passed by this Court. It is stated that even thereafter the order of suspension continues against the petitioner and even subsistence allowance has not been paid.

Learned Standing Counsel points out that petitioner was incarcerated in jail on account of which he was placed under suspension and he does not appear to have approached the authorities after he has been enlarged on bail.

From perusal of the materials brought on record, it is apparent that the order of suspension was passed on account of petitioner's incarceration in jail under Rule 4(3)(a) of the U.P. Government Servant (Disciplinary and Appeal) Rules, 1999. Petitioner ultimately has been enlarged on bail by this Court on 30th July, 2018. There is nothing on record to show that petitioner has approached the authorities for revocation of suspension on the ground that he has been bailed out.

In such circumstances, it would be appropriate to permit the petitioner to approach respondent no.3 along with certified copy of this order for revocation of the order of suspension on the ground that petitioner has already been bailed out under Rule 4(3)(b) of the aforesaid Rules of 1999.

The authority concerned shall examine petitioner's claim, particularly in view of fact that no disciplinary enquiry was otherwise initiated or pending against the petitioner. Petitioner's claim for reinstatement in service as also for release of subsistence allowance would be examined in accordance with law, by passing reasoned order, within a period of two months from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order before respondent no.3.

The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid directions.

Order Date :- 8.7.2019

M. ARIF