Ravindra Upadhyay vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 21964 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Ravindra Upadhyay vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 20 December, 2023

Author: Anand Pathak

Bench: Anand Pathak

                                                             1
                                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                      AT GWALIOR
                                                       WP No. 30560 of 2023
                                     (RAVINDRA UPADHYAY Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)

                           Dated : 20-12-2023
                                 Shri Rishabh Agrawal - Advocate for petitioner.

                                 Shri     Vivek   Khedkar     -   Additional    Advocate      General   for
                           respondents/State.

Heard on admission.

2. Present petition is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India taking exception to order dated 22.09.2023, whereby the petitioner, who is

working as Patwari, is placed under suspension.

3. It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that because of some allegations in respect of distribution of compensation to the rain/storm victims, an enquiry was conducted by the Commissioner and found that certain bank accounts did not receive compensation in correct measures. It is further submitted that the petitioner was just one of the small components of whole machinery, which distributed compensation mechanism. However, he has been terminated.

4. Incidently, a departmental enquiry was instituted in February, 2023 and

during currency of departmental enquiry, he was not placed under suspension. However, at the instance of some complaint by a public representative at Lokayukt, another enquiry is proposed to be instituted under chairmanship of Collector/Additional Collector, Bhind and that precipitates the issuance of order, whereby the petitioner is placed under suspension. At such stage, when departmental enquiry was peacefully conducted, there was no occastion for the respondents to invoke implication of Rule 9 of Madhya Pradesh (Classification,

Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966. Approach of authority is arbitrary and illegal. He relied upon the judgments passed in the cases of Ajay Kumar Choudhary Vs. Union of India reported in (2015) 7 SCC 291, Nahid Jahan Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh reported in (2017) SCC OnLine MP 2173 and Dr. G.C. Chourasia Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh reported in 2023 (4) MPLJ

5 . Learned counsel for the respondents opposed the prayer and supported the impugned order. However, he sought fortnight time to file reply.

6. Considering the submissions and the issues involved, respondents are directed to file reply on or before next date of hearing.

7. List this case on 09.01.2024 alongwith W.P.No.30557/2023.

(ANAND PATHAK) JUDGE

Ashish*