Kailash Kumar Nimoriya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 4547 MP

                     1                              W.P.No.6584/2022


              HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                          W.P. No.6584/2022
     (Kailash Kumar Nimoriya & another Vs State of M.P. and others)
Gwalior Bench:Dated -30/03/2022

      Shri Karan Virwani and Shri V.P.S.Tomar, learned counsel for

the petitioners.

      Shri G.K.Agrawal, learned Governmentt Advocate for the

respondents/State.

The present petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated

23.03.2021 (Annexure P/1) passed by respondent No.2/Transport

Commissioner, whereby petitioners have been placed under

suspension on the ground that charge-sheet has been filed against the

petitioners for framing of the charge under Sections 120-B readwith

Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC and Sections 4 read with

Section 3D(1)(2) of the Madhya Pradesh Recognised Examinations

Act, 1937.

2. It is the submission of learned counsel for petitioners that

petitioners are kept under suspension for one year and as per the

judgment in the case of Ajay Kumar Choudhary Vs. Union of India

reported in 2015(7) SCC 291 passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court, their

suspension ought to be revoked by the respondents. He relied upon the

order dated 11.02.2021 passed in Writ Petition No.17138/2020

(Rajendra Kumar Bhaskar Vs. State of M.P. and others) and circular

dated 09.04.2019 to submit that suspension deserves to be revoked.

3. Learned Government Advocate for the respondents/State, on the

basis of advance notice, opposed the prayer and submitted that

alternative remedy of appeal under Rule 23 of Madhya Pradesh Civil

Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966 is avalable

and to avoid this, this petition has been preferred because one year has

passed and time limit for filing of this petition has also been lapsed. It

is further submitted that the petitioners are accused in one of the

vyapam cases in which they are facing allegations of moral turpitute

because they tried to get appointments on misrepresentation of facts,

forged documents and cheating.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the

documents appended thereto.

5. In the case in hand, the petitioners are police constables of

transport department and facing trial for the offence as referred above.

Allegations are serious in nature in which moral turpitude is involved

because they misrepresented and tried to get appointments on the basis

of forged documents/foul play and cheating. When their case is tested

on the anvil of allegations, it appears that it is in the interest of smooth

administration that they be kept under suspension otherwise they may

tamper the official documents and thus obstruct the administration of

justice. Judgment relied upon by the petitioners move in different

factual realm and does not appear to be applicable over instant case at

this stage.

6. It is for the State to comply its circulars and for that no direction

can be given by this Court under discretionary jurisdiction under

Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Even otherwise, petitioners

are tried to circumvent the appellate proceedure and filed this petition

on merits.

7. In the cumulative analysis, no case for interference is made out.

Petition sans merit and is hereby dismissed.

                                                                            (Anand Pathak)
      Rashid                                                                   Judge
RASHID KHAN
2022.03.31 19:07:29 +05'30'
11.0.8