RAJ KUMAR JAIN Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER has filed W.P.No. 2160/2004 initially with the prayer to consider the letter of Chief-Engineer dated 10/03/2004 Annexure- P/13. It is further prayed for grant of salary from September, 2003. W.P.No. 1360/2005 was later-on field, which is directed against the suspension order Annexure-P/1.

(2.) ADMITTED facts between the parties are that petitioner was placed under suspension because of pendency of a criminal case in crime No. 136/2003 for the offence under Sections 7, 13(1)D, 13(2) of P.C. Act, 1988. During pendency of this petition, the competent Court convicted the petitioner by order dated 01/12/2006. Thereafter, respondents passed the order dated 30/04/2007 Annexure-P/18, which was challenged by way of amendment in WP(s) No.2160/2004.

(3.) PER Contra, Shri Newaskar submits that as per Article 311 of the Constitution and Rule 19(2) of M.P. Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1966, no flaw can be found in the impugned orders. Petitioner's conduct has lead to his conviction and for the said serious conduct, the employer is well within his right to dismiss the petitioner's service. In support, enabling provision under Rule 19 of CCA Rules and Article 311 of the Constitution, no GAD circular will come in the way to exercise the statutory right.