N. J. SAJIVE Vs. ASST. COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner who is an Inspector of Central Excise, working in Air Customs at Trivandrum Air Port, seeks to quash Ext. P-3 order, dated 8th September 1983 placing him under suspension with immediate effect pending disciplinary proceedings said to have been contemplated against him. This order has been attacked very strongly on several grounds. The main ground urged in support of the petition is that Ext. P-3 order has been passed in an arbitrary and unfair manner and has been grossly vitiated due to the violation of the guidelines issued by the Central Government under R.10 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, hereinafter referred to as the Rules. The counsel submitted that in spite of the counter affidavit filed in pursuance of direction of this Court, it is clear that the third respondent, who issued Ext. P-3 order, has not applied her mind at all to the guiding principles issued by the Government of India.

(2.) The petitioner entered service on 25th August 1975 as Inspector of Central Excise and claims to have a spotless record of service which has been not disputed. On 15th June 1983, the Additional Collector of Customs, the second respondent herein, served on the petitioner a memo, a copy of which is Ext. P-1, calling for his explanations for the alleged irregularities and dereliction of duty pointed out in Ext. P-1. The petitioner submitted an explanation to this memo, a copy of which is Ext. P-2, on 24th May 1983. According to the petitioner, he has given a detailed explanation for each and every charge and allegation made against him in Ext. P-1. Thereafter till 7th September 1983, the petitioner was working in the Air Customs, Trivandrum Air Port and from 7th September 1983 the petitioner entered on leave. On 15th September 1983, the petitioner received an order of suspension, a true copy of which is Ext. P-3, and immediately thereafter this original petition was filed before this Court. Along with the original petition C.M.P. No. 24281/83 was filed for staying Ext. P-3 suspension order. After hearing counsel appearing for both parties, my learned brother Chandrasekhara Menon, J. passed an order wherein the learned Judge stated as follows:

(3.) R.10 of the Rules in Part IV deals with suspension. R.10(1) reads: