BADRI PRASAD YADAV Vs. STATE OF MP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition is filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 7-1-2010 (Annexure P/6) by which the respondents have directed to place the petitioner under suspension in exercise of their powers vested with the competent authority under Regulation 35 of the State Mandi Board Service Regulations, 1998.

(2.) It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the order is without any jurisdiction as the same has not been passed by the appointing authority. Counsel for the petitioner relied upon regulations framed by the Board which are known as State Mandi Board Service Regulations, 1998 (Annexure P/8). It is contended that by virtue of ReguJadojn 35, the power to p]ace an employee under suspension is vested with the appointing authority and, therefore, the power of suspension could only be exercised by the appointing authority because there is no delegation provided under these regulations that the powers can also be exercised by any other authority to whom such delegation is permissible.

(3.) It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that under Regulation 35 though the authority other than the appointing authority i.e. Disciplinary authority can issue the charge-sheet within a period of 90 days but issuance of the charge-sheet in exercise of the powers which are vested with the Disciplinary Authority under Regulation 35 does not mean that such Disciplinary Authority would also have power to place an employee under suspension.