MACHAVARAPU RAMESH BABU Vs. STATE OF A.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in placing the petitioner under indefinite suspension as arbitrary, illegal and violative of principles of natural justice etc.

(2.) This Court has heard Sri V.V.N.Narayana Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Services for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and the standing counsel for respondent No.3, who is the essential answering respondent.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that the petitioner has been suspended from his job on the basis of a frivolous complaint given by an unknown person without application of mind. He also points out that in the impugned proceedings dated 10.07.2019, by which the petitioner was kept under suspension, there is a reference to an order passed by the District Collector on 01.07.2019 itself by which the District Collector decided to place the petitioner under suspension. Therefore, learned counsel submits that this order of suspension has been passed without application of mind and at the instance of a higher authority. Relying upon State of U.P. v. Maharaja Dharmander Prasad Singh, 1989 AIR(SC) 997, learned counsel for the petitioner argues that an authority cannot be permitted its decision to be influenced by superiors. He argues that the discretion must be exercised by the Officer concerned and not at somebody's behest. He also submits that till the date of filing of the writ petition, no charge memo has been issued nor was any Enquiry Officer, was appointed. Relying upon the settled law on the subject, learned counsel for the petitioner states that indefinite suspension is not contemplated under law and that every disciplinary enquiry should be completed in a very strict time bound manner. He, therefore, submits that the suspension of the petitioner should be revoked.