SHYAM SUNDER MAL Vs. RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is against the order dated 8. 12. 1997 which disposed of the writ petition of the appellant-petitioner by directing the respondents to decide the question of grant of selection scale which was pending before the respondent No. 1 for long, within three months from the date of receipt of the order.

(2.) THE grievance of the petitioner in this appeal is that as recorded by the learned Single Judge, the petitioner had asked for three reliefs but the aforesaid order only disposed of third relief but no order has been passed by the learned Single Judge in respect of other two reliefs. THE three reliefs prayed by the petitioner in the writ petition are as under:- (a) by an appropriate writ, order or direction the part of order dated 22. 3. 97 (Annexure 6) whereby a sum of Rs. 24,964 has already been recovered be quashed. (b) by an appropriate writ, order or direction the respondent may kindly be directed to make full payment of suspension period i. e. 28. 7. 90 to 30. 6. 91. (c) by an appropriate writ, order or direction the respondents be directed to give selection scale of 18 and 27 years of service.

(3.) IN reply to the writ petition which has been filed by the respondents in this appeal, the only justification for the impugned recovery from the petitioner of the subsistence allowance is stated to be because the enquiry was dropped no finding was recorded, he cannot be treated to be fully exonerated. IN the case of suspension being revoked and no enquiry having been held, the question of exoneration wholly or partially is irrelevant. The relevant consideration under rule could be whether there was justification for putting the employee under suspension.