KANWAR BHAN Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Arrogance of power by the Chief Minister seems to be at play in this case. Visit of the then Chief Minister to Yamuna Nagar on 4.2.2001 with the slogan 'Sarkar Aap Ke Dwar' came with a bitter pill for the petitioner. While addressing the Press conference, the Chief Minister made certain allegations against the petitioner and ordered his suspension there and then in the said press conference itself. Present days, Deputy Commissioner would hardly dare to stand and would easily buckle. The Deputy Commissioner sent a memo on 4.2.2001 for issuing formal order placing the petitioner under suspension. The Financial Commissioner-cum-Secretary meekly succumbed and obligingly issued order on 6.2.2001 placing the petitioner under suspension with immediate effect.

(2.) A senior functionary, working as Assistant Registrar in Co-operative Society, was, thus, shown disdain and humiliated in public without any officer coming to his rescue. They all rather became instrumental in perpetuating this arrogated illegality. This can happen in democratic set up governed by Rule of law would make it look as if we are living in some dictatorial era of archaic vintage.

(3.) Having placed the petitioner under suspension, the Financial Commissioner wrote to Registrar for preparing and sending a draft charges against the petitioner. The department was, thus, on the look out for finding reason to justify the suspension as the same was ordered without any justification. As per the rules, the suspension of an employee can be ordered where the disciplinary proceeding against him is contemplated or is pending or where a case against him in respect of any criminal offence is under investigation, enquiry or trial. Chief Minister would not care to know these niceties of law and the officers would not dare to point out the same. They would rather become party to find ways and means to justify this patent illegal action. Registrar Cooperative Society, who was apparently concerned with the issue of suspension, when approached to forward draft charge sheet wrote back to the Financial Commissioner that it was not possible for his office to do so. His communication would give out the ill of this misconceived and arbitrary exercise of powers of suspending the petitioner in this manner. It reads as under :-