Rajasthan High Court
Aslam Khan S/O Damu Khan vs State Of Rajasthan on 22 November, 2021
Bench: Mahendar Kumar Goyal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12401/2021
Aslam Khan S/o Damu Khan, Aged About 47 Years, Resident of
Khanpur Mewan, Tehsil Kishangarh Bass, District Alwar (Raj.)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Rajasthan, through Director General of Police,
Police Headquarter Jaipur (Raj.).
2. The Inspector General of Police, Jaipur Range, Jaipur
(Raj.).
3. The Superintendent of Police, District Bhiwadi, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Tanveer Ahamad, with
Ms. Malti
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Pushpendar Singh Naruka, for
Mr. Rupin Kala, G.C.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL
Order
22/11/2021
In view of short controversy involved in the matter, this
Court deems it just and proper to direct Mr. Pushpendar Singh
Naruka, learned counsel, present in Court to accept notices on
behalf of the respondents.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that vide order
impugned dated 13.01.2021, the petitioner was placed under
suspension in contemplation of a departmental enquiry but, even
after lapse of more than ten months, neither the charge sheet has
been served upon him nor, the suspension order has been
reviewed.
(2 of 3) [CW-12401/2021]
Relying on the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in case of
Ajay Kumar Choudhary Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors.
reported in 2015(7) SCC 291, learned counsel submitted that the
respondents are required to review the order of suspension
periodically and prays that the respondents be directed to revisit
the order dated 13.01.2021.
Learned counsel for the respondents has no objection to the
aforesaid prayer and submits that they would review the
suspension order dated 13.01.2021 within a period of four weeks.
The Hon'ble Apex Court has in case of Ajay Kumar
Choudhary (Supra) has held as under:-
"21. We, therefore, direct that the
currency of a suspension order should
not extend beyond three months if
within this period the memorandum of
charges/charge-sheet is not served on
the delinquent officer/employee; if the
memorandum of charges/charge-
sheet is served, a reasoned order
must be passed for the extension of
the suspension. As in the case in
hand, the Government is free to
transfer the person concerned to any
department in any of its offices within
or outside the State so as to sever any
local or personal contact that he may
have and which he may misuse for
obstructing the investigation against
him. The Government may also
prohibit him from contacting any
person, or handling records and
documents till the stage of his having
(3 of 3) [CW-12401/2021]
to prepare his defence. We think this
will adequately safeguard the
universally recognised principle of
human dignity and the right to a
speedy trial and shall also preserve
the interest of the Government in the
prosecution. We recognise that the
previous Constitution Benches have
been reluctant to quash proceedings
on the grounds of delay, and to set
time-limits to their duration. However,
the imposition of a limit on the period
of suspension has not been discussed
in prior case law, and would not be
contrary to the interests of justice.
Furthermore, the direction of the
Central Vigilance Commission that
pending a criminal investigation,
departmental proceedings are to be
held in abeyance stands superseded in
view of the stand adopted by us."
In view of the submissions advanced by the learned counsels
for the respective parties as also the direction issued by the
Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Ajay Kumar Choudhary (Supra),
this Court deems it just and proper to direct the respondents to
review the order dated 13.01.2021 within a period of four weeks
from the receipt of copy of this Court order.
The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.
(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J
DANISH USMANI /96
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
