Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Samundra Singh vs State Of Rajasthan on 28 May, 2021
Bench: Dinesh Mehta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7511/2021
Samundra Singh S/o Shri Babu Singh, Aged About 48 Years, R/o
Village Mawa, Tehsil Sankra, District Jaisalmer (Rajasthan)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary,
Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department,
Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur (Rajasthan)
2. The Deputy Secretary Cum Deputy Commissioner
(Inquiry), Rural Development And Panchayati Raj
Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur (Raj.)
3. The Divisional Commissioner, Jodhpur (Rajasthan)
4. The Chief Executive Officer , Zila Parishad, Jaisalmer
(Rajasthan)
5. Viikas Adhikari, Panchayat Samiti - Sankra, Headquarter -
Pokhran, District Jaisalmer (Rajasthan)
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sanjay Nahar, through Cisco
Webex App
For Respondent(s) :
JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
Order
28/05/2021
1. Mr. Nahar, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the
petitioner has been placed under suspension in exercise of powers
under Section 38(4) of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994
(hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1994').
2. He contends that the purported preliminary inquiry has been
done by way of authorizing the Chief Executive Officer vide order
dated 08.10.2020, whereas the inquiry report has been obtained
even prior to authorizing said Chief Executive Officer to conduct
preliminary inquiry.
3. Mr. Nahar further submits that so far as criminal case
pending against the petitioner is concerned, this Court has already
(2 of 2) [CW-7511/2021]
protected petitioner's right vide order dated 06.11.2020, passed in
a Criminal Misc. Petition No.3594/2020 (Samundra Singh Vs.
State), filed by the petitioner, wherein following interim order has
been passed:-
"In the meanwhile, challan of the case in pursuance to
FIR No.65/2020, Police Station Ramdeora, District
Jaisalmer shall not be presented till next date of
hearing."
4. Learned counsel submits that in view of the aforesaid, since
this Court has restrained the Investigating Officer from filing
challan in pursuance of the FIR, it cannot be said that criminal
case is pending against the petitioner and thus, first contingency
under Section 38(4) of the Act of 1994 does not exist, in light of
various judgments of this Court, as charge-sheet has not been
filed.
5. He argues that so far as second contingency of Section 38(4)
of the Act of 1994 that an incumbent can be placed under
suspension, pending disciplinary inquiry is concerned, the
petitioner has been placed under suspension on 25.05.2021 and
charge-sheet has not been served along with the order of
suspension and thus, it cannot be said that the disciplinary inquiry
is pending against the petitioner.
6. The matter requires consideration.
7. Issue notice. Issue notice of stay application also, returnable
within 8 weeks.
8. Meanwhile, effect and operation of the order dated
25.05.2021 shall remain stayed.
(DINESH MEHTA),J
39-skm/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
