P N RAIKWAR Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) REGARD being had to the similitude in the controversy involved in the matter, the above mentioned cases were heard analogously together and a common order is being passed. The facts of W.P. No. 10787/2012 are being narrated as under :-

(2.) THE petitioner before this Court holding the post of Dy. Director, Directorate of Industries, Bhopal. has filed this present writ petition being aggrieved by an order dated 15-11-2012 by which he has been placed under suspension. The contention of the petitioner is that he was also having the additional charge of the post of General Manager, District Trade & Industries Centre, Indore and he has been placed under suspension along with 3 other officers who are also posted/were posted at District Trade & Industries Centre, Indore. Petitioner has further stated that the State Government has framed Rules for allotment of land known as "M.P. State Industrial Land & Industrial Shed Management Rules, 2008" and the Rules were amended from time to time. The various amendment took place on 24-8-09, 13-10-09 and 2-2-12. Petitioner has further stated that by virtue of amendment dated 13-10-2009, incase of an industrial area, if 80% of the land stood allotted, the remaining land could have been allotted in an industrial area on the basis of first come first serve policy and there was no need to conduct any process of auction. Similarly, it has been argued that based upon subsequent amendment dated 2-2-12 which is also on record, the ceiling limit of 80% was enhanced to 90%. Petitioner has further stated that he was member of the committee which allotted land in respect of Pologround, Industrial Area, Indore and the land was allotted to various persons in the light of the amendments which took place from time to time. It has also been stated that permissions were sought from the Town & Country Planning Department. It has been further stated that clarifications were obtained from the Town & Country Planning Department and no irregularity of any kind has been done by the petitioner in the matter of allotment of land. It has also been argued that none of the allotment done by the petitioner or by the Committee has been cancelled till date by the State Government and in case some erroneous allotment was done by the Committee, the same should have been cancelled by the State Government before taking any action against the petitioner. It has been vehemently argued that the policy framed by the State Government/Rules of 2008 does permit for allotment without conducting process of auction and, therefore, the impugned suspension order which is based upon some alleged misconduct in the matter of allotment of land deserves to be quashed by this Court. It has also been argued that the impugned order has been issued in the name of His Excellency, the Governor of the State of Madhya Pradesh and, therefore, the question of preferring an appeal before His Excellency, the Governor does not arise.

(3.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties at length and perused the record. The matter is being disposed of at the admission stage itself with the consent of the parties.