Rajasthan High Court
Ram Prasad Meena S/O Shri Mohan Lal vs State Of Rajasthan on 25 February, 2022
Bench: Mahendar Kumar Goyal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1342/2022
Ram Prasad Meena S/o Shri Mohan Lal, Aged About 33 Years,
R/o Village Mandola, Tehsil Chhipabarod, District Baran
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Home
Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur
2. Director General Of Police Rajasthan, Jaipur Lal Kothi
Jaipur
3. Superintendent Of Police, Jhalawar
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anil Kumar Sharma
For Respondent(s) : Mr. P.S. Naruka for
Mr. Rupin Kala, GC
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL
Order
25/02/2022
Issue notice.
Notices are accepted by Mr. Rupin Kala, learned Government
Counsel on behalf of the respondents.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that vide order
impugned dated 02.11.2018, the petitioner, a Guard in the office
of Superintendent of Police, District Jhalawar, was placed under
suspension in contemplation of a departmental enquiry but, even
after lapse of more than three years, the suspension order has not
been reviewed.
Relying on the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in case of
Ajay Kumar Choudhary Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors.
(2 of 3) [CW-1342/2022]
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 02.11.2018.
Learned counsel for the respondents has no objection to the
aforesaid prayer.
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 to prepare his defence.
We think this will adquately 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
(3 of 3) [CW-1342/2022]
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 02.11.2018 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
PRAGATI/77
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
