Sewaram vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 11507 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9426/2021

Sewaram S/o Tejaram, Aged About 54 Years, R/o Near Veterinary Hospital, Merta Road Police Station Merta Road, District Nagaur (Raj.).

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department Of Rural Development And Panchayat Raj, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

2. The Chief Executive Officer Zila Parishad, Nagaur.

3. The Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Khinvsar, District Nagaur.

                                                                     ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)           :     Mr. Awar Dan Ujjwal
For Respondent(s)           :     -



                       JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

                                       Order

26/07/2021

1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved

against the order dated 27.11.2019 (Annex.-1), whereby the

petitioner has been placed under suspension.

2. The petitioner made representation, inter alia, indicating that

already challan against him has been filed and despite passage of

sufficiently long time, he has not been reinstated and, therefore,

the order of suspension requires review and the petitioner

deserves to be reinstated.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner with reference to

judgment in Manvendra Singh v. State of Raj. & Ors.: SBCW

No. 4276/2018, decided on 21.12.2018 at Jaipur Bench submitted

(2 of 2) [CW-9426/2021]

that the Court in the said judgment has dealt with the powers of

the disciplinary authority under Rule 13(5) of the Rules of 1958

and appellate authority under Rule 22 of the Rules of 1958 and

has held that the various circulars issued by the State Government

laying down limitation to examine the revocation of suspension

order after a period of three years from the date of

suspension/after a period of one year from the date, the charge-

sheet has been filed, was not justified and it was open for the

authorities to examine the case for revocation of suspension even

prior to the said periods fixed in the circular.

4. In the over all facts and circumstances of the case as

projected as well as the law laid down by this Court in the case of

Manvendra Singh (supra), the writ petition filed by the petitioner

is disposed of, the respondent No.2- disciplinary authority, is

directed to decide the representation made by the petitioner

(Annex.-4) in light of the judgment in the case of Manvendra

Singh (supra).

5. Needful may be done by the respondent No.2 within a period

of four weeks from the date a copy of this order is placed by the

petitioner.

6. The petitioner would be free to file a further representation

alongwith requisite documents before the disciplinary authority.

7. Stay application also stands disposed of accordingly.

(DINESH MEHTA),J

91-pooja/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)