Rajasthan High Court
Ms. Jaya Kanwar Shekhawat D/O Shri ... vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 27 February, 2023
Bench: Sudesh Bansal
[2023/RJJP/003375]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3084/2023
Ms. Jaya Kanwar Shekhawat D/o Shri Mahendra Singh
Shekhawat, Aged About 37 Years, R/o C-138, Singhbhumi,
Khatipura, Jaipur.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary,
Corporative Department Having Its Office At Secretariat,
Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. Registrar, Rajasthan Coperative Societies, Having Its
Office At Nehru Sahkar Bhawan, Bhawani Singh Road,
Jaipur.
3. Joint Registrar (Admn.), Rajasthan Coperative Societies,
Having Its Office At Nehru Sahkar Bhawan, Bhawani
Singh Road, Jaipur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : None Present
For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL
Order
27/02/2023
1. Petitioner has challenged the order of suspension dated
01.09.2022.
2. Petitioner has pleaded in the writ petition that she was
posted as Inspector (Executive) in the Office of Deputy Registrar
Co-operative Societies, Jaipur and on account of her arrest in FIR
No.316/2022, she was placed under suspension vide impugned
order dated 01.09.2022 invoking powers under Rule 13(1) of the
Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules,
1958. It has further been pleaded that petitioner submitted
[2023/RJJP/003375] (2 of 3) [CW-3084/2023]
representation dated 20.12.2022 (Ann.3) before respondent-
Department for review/revocation of her suspension and for
reinstatement, but the same has not been decided so far and still
pending.
Reliance has been placed on the judgment of Hon'ble
Supreme Court in case of Ajay Kumar Choudhary Vs. Union of
India [(2015) 7 SCC 291]. The relevant paragraph i.e. Para
No.21 of the judgment is reproduced hereunder:
"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
concerned person 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 adequately safeguard the
universally recognized principle of human dignity and the right
to a speedy trial and shall also preserve the interest of the
Government in the prosecution. We recognize that 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."
3. Taking into consideration the fact that representation of
petitioner dated 20.12.2022 is still pending before respondents,
this Court deems it just and proper to direct respondent-
Department to consider and decide the representation of
petitioner by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a
period of 90 days from the receipt of certified copy of this Order.
[2023/RJJP/003375] (3 of 3) [CW-3084/2023]
4. With aforesaid observations, the instant writ petition is
disposed of.
5. Stay application and other pending application(s), if any,
stand disposed of.
(SUDESH BANSAL),J
SACHIN/11
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
