Narendra Harsh vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 7922 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3634/2021 Narendra Harsh S/o Shri Dinesh Chandra Harsh, Aged About 55 Years, R/o 84-K-52, Jai Narayan Vyas Colony , Chandpole Chowka , Upkeshwar Road, Jodhpur

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary To The Government , Urban Development And Housing Department , Government Of Rajasthan , Secretariat , Jaipur

2. Director And Joint Secretary, Directorate Of Local Self Department , Rajasthan , Jaipur

3. Commissioner, Municipal Corporation , Jodhpur (North)

4. Deputy Commissioner, Municipal Corporation , Jodhpur (North)

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mukesh Rajpurohit

JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA Judgment 22/03/2021

1. By way of the present writ petition the petitioner has called

in question the disciplinary enquiry initiated against the petitioner.

2. Mr. Rajpurohit, learned counsel for the petitioner, invited

Court's attention towards the memorandum of charges dated

11.02.2021 and submitted that on the same allegations, an FIR

dated 02.01.2021 has been lodged against the petitioner and if

the disciplinary enquiry is continued against the petitioner, it

would adversely affect petitioner's defence in the criminal case

pending against him.

3. I have perused the FIR dated 02.01.2021, relied upon by the

petitioner, vis-a-vis the memorandum of charges.

(2 of 2) [CW-3634/2021]

4. A perusal of the FIR in question reveals that one Piyush

Salecha has lodged the same against various persons, including

the petitioner, wherein allegations have been levelled is that the

petitioner along with various other persons has demolished the

premises, which was under his tenancy.

5. The complainant has levelled allegations of theft and illegal

demolition of the disputed premises, whereas vide memorandum

of charges dated 11.02.2021, the respondent - Municipal

Corporation is proceeding, as the petitioner had neither followed

the due procedure for demolition of Nimaj Ki Haveli in Ward No.38

nor had he undertaken requisite precautionary measures.

6. It is thus, clear that the respondent - Corporation is

proceeding against the petitioner for negligence and irregularities

committed by him while demolishing the building in question and

also for the delay in demolition of the building, whereas the

allegations in the FIR are wrongfully demolishing the building.

Allegations in FIR and memorandum of charges are not identical.

7. This being the position, in considered opinion of this Court

the principle that disciplinary enquiry cannot go hand in hand,

when criminal trial is pending, is not at all applicable in the

present factual backdrop.

8. This Court does not find it to be a case warranting

interference in the disciplinary enquiry against the petitioner.

9. The writ petition is, thus, dismissed.

10. Stay application too stands dismissed accordingly.

(DINESH MEHTA),J 51-A.Arora/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)