Allahabad High Court
Ravi Prakash Singh vs State Of U P And 4 Others on 14 December, 2022
Bench: Sangeeta Chandra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 37
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 18891 of 2022
Petitioner :- Ravi Prakash Singh
Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Virendra Yadav,Rakesh Kumar Yadav
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Suyash Agarwal
Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Suyash Agarwal, learned counsel appearing for the respondent nos. 2 to 5.
2. This petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging suspension order dated 13.9.2022 passed by the respondent no. 3, Superintending Engineer, Purvanchal Power Distribution Corporation Limited, Mau.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that although the suspension order says that the petitioner is being suspended in contemplation of regular disciplinary proceedings, no Inquiry Officer has been appointed and charge sheet has also not been given to the petitioner. It has also been submitted that the petitioner was ill and had filed an application on 17.2.2022 for medical / casual leave for five days. He was thereafter sent for training as Polling Officer in General Assembly Election and he performed his duties till 7.3.2022 in the said election. The petitioner again fell ill and consulted with the Doctor of Primary Health Centre on 9.3.2022. He was advised bed rest till 18.06.2022. On 24.5.2022, the respondent no. 5 sent a letter to the petitioner saying that he has been absenting from Office since 15.2.2022. The petitioner filed a representation dated 27.6.2022 mentioning his grievance, however, the same was ignored. Another letter was issued to him on 24.8.2022 to remain present before the Executive Engineer in his Office within three days or otherwise face further proceeding against him. The petitioner was also asked to get settled/verified the revenue collection. He had sent a letter dated 2.9.2022. The petitioner filed an application before his Higher Officers and before the District Magistrate regarding irregularity in revenue collection and fraudulent activities of other officers. When no heed was paid, the petitioner also filed a complaint case on 9.6.2022 before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mau, under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., wherein arguments have been heard and judgment has been reserved. While awaiting judgment, the petitioner has now been saddled with the suspension order which obviously has been issued with malafide intent and therefore, this Court should interfere in the said suspension order.
4. This Court has perused the suspension order. It appears that a complaint was made by the Sub Divisional Officer, Power Distribution Sub Division-I, Ghosi to the Superintending Engineer that the petitioner has not attended the office for the past six months. He has also not got verified the revenue collection. There was chances of grave financial irregularities / embezzlement have been committed by the petitioner. In contemplation of inquiry against the petitioner, he has been suspended.
5. No fault can be found with the order impugned as it has been passed in contemplation of inquiry. However, since no Inquiry Officer has been appointed and no charge sheet has been issued to the petitioner, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Superintending Engineer, the respondent no. 3 to appoint an Inquiry Officer within fifteen days from the date of receipt of the order passed by this Court. The Inquiry Officer shall formulate the charge sheet which will be proved by the Appointing Authority and served on the petitioner within next fifteen days thereafter. The inquiry proceedings shall be completed within a period of four months giving reasonable opportunity to the petitioner to defend himself. In case, petitioner refuses to cooperate, the Inquiry Officer may proceed ex parte after noting down detailed reasons for the same in the order sheet. The Inquiry Report shall be submitted by the Inquiry Officer to the Appointing Authority, who shall issue show cause notice to the petitioner and after considering the petitioner's reply, appropriate orders be passed within a period of two months thereafter. On conclusion of the inquiry, by the Inquiry Officer and submission of Inquiry Report, the petitioner shall be reinstated subject to final orders being passed in the disciplinary proceedings against him by the Appointing Authority.
Order Date :- 14.12.2022
SA
