Panna Ram vs The State Of Rajasthan ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 2779 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Panna Ram vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 27 March, 2024

[2024:RJ-JD:14169]



      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5113/2024
Panna Ram S/o Sh. Rana Ram, Aged About 52 Years, R/o Village
And Post Lunawas Khara, P.s. Jhanwar, District Jodhpur.
                                                                    ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
1.        The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary,
          Department Of Home Affairs, Government Of Rajasthan,
          Jaipur.
2.        The Director General Of Police, Headquarters, Jaipur.
3.        The Inspector         General      Of     Police,      Jodhpur   Range,
          Jodhpur.
4.        The Superintendent Of Police, Jodhpur Rural.
                                                                 ----Respondents


 For Petitioner(s)          :    Mr. Sushil Solanki.
 For Respondent(s)          :

               HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA

Order (Oral)

27/03/2024

1. Petitioner herein is aggrieved by an order dated 25.07.2022

(Annex.1), vide which his services were placed under suspension

owing to registration of an FIR against him under Prevention of

Corruption Act.

2. It is asserted, that a charge sheet in the criminal proceedings

against the petitioner has already been filed. However, despite

this, the petitioner has not been reinstated. The suspension order

should be revoked as the petitioner deserves to be reinstated at

this stage.

3. The learned counsel for petitioner relies on the judgment

rendered by this Court in Manvendra Singh v. State of Raj. & Ors.:

SBCW No. 4276/2018, decided on 21.12.2018. He urges that in

the said judgment, the Court addressed the powers of the

[2024:RJ-JD:14169] (2of 2) [CW-5113/2024]

disciplinary authority under Rule 13(5) of the Rules of 1958 and

the appellate authority under Rule 22 of the Rules of 1958. He

would canvass that even the administrative circulars issued by the

State Government envisage revocation of suspension orders after

a period of three years from the date of suspension or after a

period of one year from the date of filing of the charge sheet. It is

within the discretion of competent authority to examine the case

for revocation of suspension even before the expiry of the fixed

periods.

4. Learned counsel submits that petitioner is sanguine of a

favorable treatment in light of the judgment, ibid, provided the

disciplinary authority takes up his case on the administrative side

for passing appropriate orders.

5. In the premise, without commenting on the merits of the case,

in view of the submission as aforesaid, competent authority is

directed to take necessary action, in accordance with law, within a

period of four weeks from the date petitioner approaching the

respondents with web print of the instant order. He is at liberty to

file an appropriate representation, if so advised.

6. It is, however, made clear that instant order is on the basis of

submissions as noted herein above and the respondents are free

to examine the accuracy / applicability thereof. Only if the

averments are found to be correct, petitioner shall then be entitled

to the relief sought by him.

7. Disposed of.

(ARUN MONGA),J 64-Rmathur/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)