PRITHVI RAJ MEENA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is a Zila Pramukh of District Sawaimadhopur who has challenged the order of suspension passed against him by the respondent-State on 15. 01. 2003 as contained in Annexure-9.

(2.) IT was submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. Bharat Vyas that the order of suspension dated 15. 01. 2003 is not in consonance with the provisions of Section 38 (4) of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (for short "the Act of 1994") since this provision envisages that the State Government may in writing and after giving an opportunity of hearing to the concerned Zila Pramukh and making such enquiry as can remove or suspend only if the enquiry had already been initiated against the chairperson or a deputy chairperson of a Panchayati Raj Institution. According to the petitioner's advocate the order of suspension was passed on 15. 01. 2003 although no enquiry for the allegations/charges levelled against the petitioner was in existence. Learned counsel relied upon a Division Bench Judgment Ram Lal Choudhary vs. State of Raj. & Ors. (1), in order to reinforce his submission that if an enquiry was not existing on the date when the order of suspension was passed, the same was not fit to remain effective.