KARTAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant writ petition has been filed for quashing the suspension order dated 6-1-2000 (Annexure P/4) passed under Section 63 of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 1959 (for short, "the Act") by the State Government against the petitioner the Chairman of Municipal Board, Gulabpura.

(2.) The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that petitioner was elected as a Member and subsequently the Chairman of the Municipal Board, Gulabpura (district Bhilwara) in August, 1995. He was issued a show cause notice dated 17-7-1999 (Annexure P/1) under Section 63 of the Act calling upon him to furnish his explanation with respect to allegations mentioned therein. The said allegations reveal that there was a gross negligence on the part of the petitioner in collecting the octroi on certain material at the prescribed rate; secondly, misuse of funds in making payment of telephone bills; and thirdly, misuse of funds in repairing of the official car. Petitioner submitted the reply on 24-9-1999 (Annexure P/2) denying all the allegations. However, the State Government passed the order dated 6-1-20 (Annexure P/4) putting the petitioner under suspension and holding the judicial inquiry. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied, petitioner preferred Writ Petition No. 113/2000, which was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 17-1-2000, directing the petitioner to file a representation before the Competent Authority to consider his application for withdrawal of the suspension order. While issuing such direction, the Court placed reliance upon the judgment of this Court in Radhey Shyam Sharma v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1985 Raj 65, wherein it has been held that before filing a writ petition challenging the suspension order, the person concerned should make a representation for its revocation before the State Government. Petitioner filed a representation before the Competent Authority on 29-1-2000 (Annexure P/5), which has been dismissed by the State Government vide order dated 16-3-2000 (Annexure P/6). Hence this writ petition.

(3.) Initially, the State Government had taken a decision to hold an inquiry and as there was an apprehension that petitioner may affect the fate of the inquiry, his suspension was found to be necessary. Petitioner's representation for withdrawal of suspension order was rejected vide order dated 16-3-2000 (Annexure P/6) on the ground that as there were serious complaints against the petitioner of misuse of funds and favouring particular persons in charging the lesser rate of octroi etc., a preliminary enquiry was held and prima facie the Government was satisfied that the Chairman and the Executive Officer had committed the misconduct and both of them were given show cause notice on 17-7-1999 to furnish their explanation and after considering their reply, the Government took a decision to hold an inquiry under Section 63 of the Act, to refer the matter for judicial inquiry and to put the Chairman under suspension. It was, also, decided to proceed against the Executive Officer under Rule 16 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1958 (for short, "the C.C.A. Rules 1958"). The objections raised by the petitioner in his representation against the suspension order are not worth merit as the Executive Officer has also been dealt with under Rule 16 of the C.C.A. Rules, 1958, the Chairman cannot shift his entire responsibilities on him and he has to be dealt with separately under the provisions of Section 63 of the Act, which provides a special procedure and as the judicial inquiry has also begun, there was no justification in revoking the suspension order.