PREM SHANKAR VERMA Vs. R F C JAIPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed challenging the order of suspension and also praying for stay of the operation of the suspension order dated 23/8/2002 (Ann.3).

(2.) Learned counsel for petitioner has argued that while suspension of the petitioner was made on 23/8/2002. Two other employees namely; Sajjan Singh Rathore and R.S. Gehlot were also suspended because they were also posted at the place as Branch Manager RFC and Shri Amer Choudhary Patwari immediately before the petitioner. In the order of suspension dated 23/8/1982 itself, it is contended that respondents have placed the petitioner under suspension as per the guidelines of the Department of Personnel dated 10/8/2001 wherein it is provided that in case prosecution sanction has been granted against the public servant, they ought to be placed under suspension. The said circular has since been reviewed and revised by the Department of Personnel by subsequent circular dated 3/6/2006 providing that in case where investigation/trial of the case is stayed by any court, it would not be advisable to continue suspension order and such person be reinstated in service. Learned counsel has invited attention of the court towards the order dated 16/1/2003 by which this Court at the Principal Seat at Jodhpur in SB Cr.Revision Petition No.35/2003 filed by an employee has stayed further proceedings in the crucial trial. Learned counsel contended that respondents themselves have by order dated 3/12/2004 revoked suspension order dated 4/5/2000 passed in the case of Shri R.S. Gehlot and has reinstated him in service without initiating departmental proceedings whereas fact is that Shri R.S. Gehlot is also one of the accused against whom prosecution sanction was granted.

(3.) Learned counsel for respondents has opposed the writ petition and argued that Shri R.S. Gehlot was reinstated in service without any prejudice to the outcome of the departmental proceedings pending against him. At that time, he was on deputation at Ajmer. It is contended that in the revision petition, trial has been stayed by the court on finding certain irregularities against three persons namely, petitioner, Shri R.S. Gehlot and Shri Sajjan Singh Rathore but the respondents decided to place the petitioner under suspension. It is conotended that till the trial is over and the petitioner is acquitted, there should be no order for his reinstatement.