D D SURI Vs. GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner Shri D.D. Suri was a member of the Indian Administrative Service allotted to the cadre of the State of Orissa. By a notification dated 13th August, 1962 issued under section 4(l)(s) of the Code of Criminal procedure, 1898, the Government of Orissa declared the offices of Superintendents of police, Vigilance, at Cuttack, Sambalpur and Berhampurto be police stations for purposes of certain offences including those punishable under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. On 24.11.1967 police case No. 23 was registered in the Sambalpur Police Station. Vigilance, against the petitioner. On 24.11,1967, the police applied to the A.D.M., Cuttack, for the issue of a search warrant against the petitioner after staling the information received by the police of the petitioner having allegedly committed offences punishable under section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. A search warrant was issued on the same date. As the search was bsing carried out on 28.11.1967 the Government of Orissa passed an order under rule 7(3) of the All India Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1955 placing the petitioner under suspension until the termination of the investigation relating to acriminal charge then proceeding against the petitioner. After the completion of the police investigation against the petitioner, the Government of Orissa requested the Government of India in 1968 to accord sanction for launchinga prosecution against the petitioner for offences punishable under section 5(2)oftheprevention of Corruption Act. The sanction was, however, never accorded by the Government of India. On 18.2.1971. however, the Government of India prematurely retired the petitioner under rule 16(3) of the All India Services (Death-cm-Retirement Benefits) Rules, 1958 [hereinafter called the AIS(DCRB) Rules] in public interest on the expiry of three months from the date of the service of the said order on the petitioner. It is understood that a prosecution against the petitioner under section 5(2) of the prevention of [Corruption Act has been launched by the Government of Orissa after the retirement of petitioner without any sanction from the Government of India.

(2.) In a writ petition (O.J.C. No. 82 of 1968) filed in January 1968 by the petitioner against the State of Orissa, the concerned officers of the Government of Orissa and the Union of India, the petitioner prayed that the police investigation against him and the order of suspension passed by the Government of Orissa against him should be quashed. This writ petition was at first dismissed in limine by the Orissa High Court but the said order of dismissal was set aside by the Supreme Court who directed the Orissa High Court to decide the writ petition on merits. On 25th April, 1972, however, a Division Bench of the Orissa High Court dismissed the said writ petition on the ground that it had become infructuous on the retirement from service of the petitioner on 9.6.1971.

(3.) The present wri'. petition was filed by Shri-Suri on 30.3.1972 praying that the order of suspension dated 28.11.1967 passed by the Government of Orissa and the order of retirement dated 18.2.1971 passed by the Government of India be set aside.