K K ARORA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By these orders I propose to finally dispose of the writ petition, since pleadings have been completed and parties have been heard at length.

(2.) In order to avoid prolixity the interim orders passed on 28.4.2005 are reproduced since the question is whether these should be recalled, modified or confirmed: The challenge in this Writ Petition is to the Order of Suspension of the Petitioner. The charge against the Petitioner is that on 3rd April, 2004, the day on which he was on leave (Saturday), he had attempted to remove several files/documents of the Council. The Petitioner has not admitted the Charge. In State of Orissa (Through its Principal Secretary, Home Dept.) Vs. Bimal Kumar Mohanty [ (1994) 4 SCC 126 ], the Hon'ble Supreme Court has taken pains to opine that it is not automatic that a delinquent should be suspended pending an enquiry. The following extract encapsulates the law :

(3.) The suspension order was directed to be held in abeyance and the Respondents have complied with this direction. Pleadings have been completed and further detailed arguments have been addressed on behalf of the parties.