Trikamdan Charan vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 9015 Raj

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 9015 Raj
Judgement Date : 3 November, 2023

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Trikamdan Charan vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 3 November, 2023

Bench: Arun Bhansali

[2023:RJ-JD:37614]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17441/2023

Trikamdan Charan S/o Shri Raidan Singh Charan, Aged About 40 Years, Village Velangiri Tehsil And District Sirohi (Rajasthan).

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Local Self Department Of Rajasthan, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

2. The Director Cum Joint Secretary, Directorate Local Self Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. C.S. Kotwani.

For Respondent(s)             :


             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI
                            Order

03/11/2023

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in similar

circumstances, a Coordinate Bench of this Court in Dinesh Kumar

Chanda v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.: S.B. Civil Writ Petition

No.15157/2023, decided on 12.10.2023, has granted relief and as

the case of the petitioner is similar to the said case, similar order

may be passed.

2. The Coordinate Bench in the case of Dinesh Kumar (supra)

has observed and directed as under:-

"Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The present writ petition has been filed against the order dated 27.12.2022 (Annex.2), whereby the petitioner has been placed under suspension.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after passing the suspension order dated 27.12.2022 (Annex.2), neither any charge sheet has been filed

[2023:RJ-JD:37614] (2 of 3) [CW-17441/2023]

against the petitioner nor any disciplinary inquiry has been initiated by the respondents. In support of the arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of Ajay Kumar Choudhary Vs. Union of India (UOI) & Ors., reported in 2015 (7) SCC 291 and the observations of the Hon'ble Division Bench in the case of Jahangir Ali Khan Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors. (D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No.662/2022), wherein on 25.05.2022, the following order was passed:-

"The law declared by the Supreme Court, binding under Article 141 of the Constitution of India on all Courts and the Tribunals, is that the suspension order should not extend beyond three months if within this period, the memorandum of charges/charge sheet is not served on the delinquent employee. If on facts it is found that charge sheet has not been filed in criminal case or memorandum of charges, n the event the department decides to hold departmental inquiry, has not been issued within three months, the suspension order would come to an automatic end. On facts of the present case, it is clear that initially the suspension order was issued on31.03.2021, declaring deemed suspension w.e.f. 17.03.2021 on account of arrest and detention for more than 48 hours. The same was challenged before this Court and the appellant was allowed to make representation. The representation was rejected on 10.01.2022 i.e. almost after ten months of the deemed suspension. The order nowhere refers to issuance of any memorandum of charges in any departmental enquiry initiated by the department much less filing of charge sheet in the Criminal Court relating to the offences in connection with which deemed suspension had taken place. On aforesaid factual aspects, which are not in dispute, the law declared by the Supreme Court in the case of Ajay Kumar Choudhary (supra) does not warrant continuance of the order of suspension. This extra- ordinary situation was taken into consideration by the Tribunal to stay the order of suspension. All the

[2023:RJ-JD:37614] (3 of 3) [CW-17441/2023]

Courts and Tribunals are bound by the law declared by the Supreme Court under Article 141 of the Constitution of India. Since the order passed by the Tribunal is based on the Supreme Court's judgment in Ajay Kumar Choudhary's case, we find that the order could not be interfered with only on the ground that it was ex parte or passed 10 months after the suspension order was issued." Keeping in view the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and of this Court, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks liberty to approach the respondents by way of filing a detailed representation and prays that the respondents may be directed to consider the case of the petitioner for revocation of the suspension order dated 27.12.2022 within a stipulated period of time from the date of filing such representation.

Considering the limited prayer of the petitioner, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction that in the event of filing such representation by the petitioner, the respondent No.2- Director cum Joint Secretary, Directorate Local Self Department, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur (Rajasthan) shall consider the same keeping in mind the law laid down by this Court as well as the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the above-mentioned cases and pass an appropriate order within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of such representation, strictly in accordance with law."