Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Hanuman Ram vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:49533) on 17 November, 2025
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2025:RJ-JD:49533]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 22493/2025
Hanuman Ram S/o Shri Bhanwar Ram, Aged About 33 Years,
Resident Of Chatarwalo Ki Dhani, Baitu, District Barmer. At
Present Working As Patwari (Under Suspension) Patwar Mandal
Sangad, Tehsil Fatehgarh District Jaisalmer.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of
Revenue Group-I, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The District Collector (Land Revenue), Jaisalmer.
3. Sub Divisional Officer, Jaisalmer.
4. Tehsildar (Revenue) Fatehgarh, District Jaisalmer.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ramawatar Singh
For Respondent(s) : -
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
17/11/2025
1. The petitioner has preferred the instant writ petition under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India being aggrieved of the
initiation of departmental equiry under Rule 16 of the Rajasthan
Civil Services (CCA) Rules, 1958 against him and issuance of the
charge-sheet dated 02.05.2025 (Annex.3). The alternative prayer
of the petitioner is to stay the proceedings of the departmental
enquiry under charge No.1 till completion of the criminal trial
pending against him arising out of FIR No.36/2025 registered at
the Special Police Station, CPS Jaipur, ACB District.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner while maintaining that the
disciplinary enquiry in question firstly cannot be continued as the
(Uploaded on 18/11/2025 at 12:44:49 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:49533] (2 of 3) [CW-22493/2025]
respondent department is having no material in relation to the
delinquency or the offence allegedly committed by the petitioner,
further contended that continuation of such enquiry is bound to
prejudice petitioner's defence in the criminal trial. While relying
upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Capt.
M. Paul Anthony Vs. Bharat Gold Mines Ltd. & Anr. reported in
(1999) 3 SCC 679, learned counsel urged that in light of the
principles enunciated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the
departmental enquiry under charge No.1 cannot continue against
the petitioner, regardless of the nature of the offences alleged.
3. Having perused the memorandum of charges served upon the
petitioner and after considering the law on the subject, more
particularly the judgments cited, this court is of the view that the
departmental enquiry under charge No.1 against the petitioner
deserves to be kept on hold.
4. Accordingly, it is ordered that the departmental enquiry
initiated against the petitioner for charge No.1 under Rule 16 of
the Rajasthan Civil Services (CCA) Rules, 1958, in relation to
which the impugned memorandum and charge-sheet dated
02.05.2025 (Annex.3) has been served upon him, shall remain
stayed till culmination of the criminal trial pending against him
arising out of FIR No.36/2025 registered at the Special Police
Station, CPS Jaipur, ACB District. After culmination of the trial in
the aforesaid case, the disciplinary authority shall take up the
proceedings from the current stage under intimation to the
petitioner and thereafter proceed in accordance with law. It is
made clear that the outcome of the criminal trial shall not
influence the departmental enquiry as would be proceeded with
(Uploaded on 18/11/2025 at 12:44:49 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:49533] (3 of 3) [CW-22493/2025]
subsequently and department would be at liberty to proceed with
in accordance with law.
5. The writ petition is disposed of in these terms.
6. No order as to costs
(FARJAND ALI),J
346-chhavi/-
(Uploaded on 18/11/2025 at 12:44:49 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
