A THANKAPPAN Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR KOZHIKODE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AN young agricultural graduate, who got a regular appointment as Junior Agricultural Officer, N. E. S. Block, Balussery, kozhikode District only four months back as per Ext. P2 order dated 21-8-1972 of the Director of Agriculture, has approached this Court with a prayer for quashing Ext. P3 order dated 13-12-1972 of the District Collector, Calicut suspending him from service pending enquiry of the allegations of misconduct against him. Ext. P3 proceeds on the basis of a report of the Assistant development Commissioner that it was represented to him by the Block development Officer when be visited the Block Office on 12-12-1972 that the petitioner behaved in a ruffianly manner and abused the Block Development officer in the presence of the public who had gone to his office on business, that three members of the staff testified to this conduct of the petitioner, that the petitioner acted in a very arbitrary way in the distribution of the very rare and highly fancied T & D seedlings though he had been specifically instructed by the Block Development Officer to do the distribution in consultation with the Village Extension Officer and that the Block Office peon detected the attempt of the petitioner to remove certain records in the absence of the B. D. O. presumably in an attempt to tamper them. On the next day, i. e. , on 13121972 the Collector acting on the report took the view that the continued presence of the petitioner in the Block is a menance to peaceful life there and therefore ordered that the petitioner may be kept under suspension with immediate effect pending enquiry against him.

(2.) THE petitioner denies the facts stated in Ext. P3 order and challenges this order on three grounds: (a) THE District Collector has no power to suspend him under R. 10 of the Kerala Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal)Rules as he is not any authority coming within that rule. (b) THE Collector has not applied his mind to the various allegations levelled against the petitioner or made any preliminary enquiry on the truth of these allegations and then come to a prima facie conclusion for taking disciplinary proceedings. (c) Nor has he applied his mind to the question whether on these allegations it is necessary in the then prevailing circumstances and in public interest to suspend the petitioner.

(3.) THEN we shall look into Ext. RI. As stated earlier, it is a copy of a Government order No. LR (C)2-521/56/rd dated 18-2-1957. It relates to the question of delegation of more powers to the Board of Revenue and Officers of the Revenue Department Part A of it relates to the delegation of powers to the Board of Revenue to purchase articles worth not more than Rs. 500/- and to appoint contingent staff upto 3 months. Part B relates to the delegation of powers to the District Collector in respect of 13 items. Parts C, d and E relate to the delegation of powers to the Personal Assistant to the district Collector, Revenue Divisional Officers and Tahsildars respectively. The learned Government Pleader relied on item 13 in Part B relating to the powers of the Collectors which reads as follows: " (13) to suspend, dismiss, degrade, retire or accept the resignation of Non gazetted officers of the District subject to rules regarding the disciplinary action against Government servants. " and contended that this amounts to a conferment of power as required by R. 10 of Classification, Control and Appeal Rules. I cannot accept this contention as correct. The Government order is issued as a proceedings of the Government is the Revenue Department and relates to the delegation of powers on certain officers of the Board of Revenue and officers of the Revenue Department. The various items mentioned relate to the delegation of powers in respect of matters relating to Revenue Department and item 13 has also only that scope. "the non. gazetted officers of the District" mentioned in that item considered in the background of the other items mentioned in the Government Order mean only such officers of the Revenue department in the District. This item does not satisfy the requirement of R. 10 of the Kerala Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules.