Heera Lal vs The State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 4107 Raj

[2023/RJJD/013559]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1352/2023

Heera Lal S/o Sh. Kewalaji Meghwal, Aged About 53 Years, R/o Behind Govt. Primary School, Shobhagpura Circle, Udaipur.

----Petitioner Versus

1. The State of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department of Revenue, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

2. Theb District Collector, Udaipur.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sushil Solanki

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Order

04/05/2023

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved

against the order dated 12.12.2022 (Annex.2), whereby the

petitioner has been placed under suspension.

It is, inter alia, indicating that challan against the petitioner

has not 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.

The petitioner with reference to judgment in Manvendra

Singh v. State of Raj. & Ors.: SBCW No. 4276/2018, decided on

21.12.2018 submitted 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

[2023/RJJD/013559] (2 of 2) [CW-1352/2023]

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.

In the over all facts & 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 disciplinary authority is directed to decide the

representation to be made by the petitioner in light of the

judgment in the case of Manvendra Singh (supra).

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.

The order has been passed based on the submissions made

in the petition, the respondents would be free to examine the

veracity of the submissions made in the petition and only in case,

the averments made therein are found to be correct, the petitioner

would be entitled to the relief.

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J 42-Shahenshah/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)