Brij Lal vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 1239 Raj

[2023/RJJD/003672]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1848/2023

Brij Lal S/o Khiya Ram, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Ward No. 4, 11 Sd, Jankidaswala, Sri-Ganganagar, Rajasthan.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Department Of Rural Development And Panchayati Raj, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat Jaipur, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

2. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Sri-Ganganagar.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kanishk Singhvi

JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

Order

02/02/2023

1. The office objections are overruled.

2. The matter is taken up for consideration today itself.

3. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner

aggrieved against the order dated 28.01.2022 (Annex.-1),

whereby the petitioner has been placed under suspension.

4. The petitioner made representation, inter alia,

indicating that already challan against the petitioner has been filed

and despite passage of sufficiently long time, the petitioner has

not been reinstated and, therefore, the order of suspension

requires review and the petitioner deserves to be reinstated.

5. 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

[2023/RJJD/003672] (2 of 2) [CW-1848/2023]

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.

6. 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 - disciplinary authority, is directed

to decide the representations made by the petitioner in light of the

judgment in the case of Manvendra Singh (supra).

7. The needful may be done by the respondents within a

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

by the petitioner.

8. The petitioner would be free to file a further

representation alongwith requisite documents before the

disciplinary authority.

(DINESH MEHTA),J 182-Mak/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)