K D DESAI Vs. HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was working as assistant Judge, Mehsana when he came to be suspended with effect from 1. 4. 1993. On 29. 11. 1994, the High Court issued chargesheet against the petitioner containing four charges. The Inquiry was entrusted to the then learned Additional Principal Judge, city Civil Court, Ahmedabad. The petitioner filed his written statement of defence. The department examined several witnesses. The petitioner did not examine himself as a witness, nor did he produce any other witness. The Inquiry Officer submitted report dated 25. 9. 1997 that the charges levelled against the petitioner were not proved at all. After considering the said report, the High Court passed the order dated 21. 11. 1997 holding that the charges levelled against the petitioner were not proved and he was, therefore, exonerated of all the charges. The order further provided that as the charges were not proved against the petitioner, the order of suspension for the said Inquiry was recalled but notice was ordered to be issued under Rule 152 of the bcsr to the petitioner calling upon him to show cause as to why the period of suspension should not be treated as not spent on duty.

(2.) THE petitioner was accordingly given show cause notice under Rule 152. The petitioner submitted his reply dated 15. 12. 1997. After considering the same, the high Court on the administrative side (hereinafter referred to as "the Competent authority") passed the impugned order dated 10. 9. 1998 taking the view that the petitioner could not be treated as on duty with reference to the Inquiry in question. The High Court held that the order of suspension cannot be said to be wholly unjustified and that the period of suspension was required to be treated as such; that the delinquent was not entitled to the pay, allowances and other benefits for the said period. It is the aforesaid order which is under challenge in this petition.

(3.) BEFORE setting out the contentions raised by the learned Counsel for the petitioner, it is necessary to set out the provisions of Rule 152 :-