Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Dr. Indraram Ranwa vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 6 November, 2023
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
[2023:RJ-JD:38045]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15836/2022
Dr. Indraram Ranwa S/o Shri Baluram Ranwa, Aged About 44
Years, Khichdo Ki Dhani, Banuda, Tehsil Dantaramgarh, District
Sikar (Rajasthan).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Medical And
Health Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur
(Rajasthan).
2. The Deputy Secretary To Government, Department Of
Personnel (A-Iii/com.), Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur
(Rajasthan).
3. The Superintendent Of Police-Administration, Anti
Corruption Bureau, Jaipur (Rajasthan).
4. The Chief Medical And Health Officer, Nagaur (Rajasthan).
5. The Principal Medical Officer, Government Bangur
Hospital, Deedwana, Nagaur (Rajasthan).
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Swati Shekhar.
For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
06/11/2023
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. The present writ petition has been filed against the order
dated 23.08.2022 (Annex.3), whereby the petitioner has been
placed under suspension.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after passing
the suspension order dated 23.08.2022 (Annex.3), neither any
chargesheet has been filed against the petitioner nor any
(Downloaded on 11/11/2023 at 08:37:28 PM)
[2023:RJ-JD:38045] (2 of 3) [CW-15836/2022]
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 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."
(Downloaded on 11/11/2023 at 08:37:28 PM)
[2023:RJ-JD:38045] (3 of 3) [CW-15836/2022]
4. 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 23.08.2022 within a stipulated period of time from the
date of filing such representation.
5. 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.
(DR. PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.
3-/Jitender//-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
