HARI KISHAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant petition has been filed by petitioner assailing order of suspension passed by the authority in exercise of power under R.13 of Rules, 1958 vide order dt.30th January, 2008 [Ann.2] on the premise that a case under Prevention of Corruption Act for being trapped red handed, was registered against him. Petitioner while working as Patwari, for the incidence of 14th January, 2008, he was trapped red handed by Anti Corruption Department and an FIR No.18/2008 u/s.13(1)(d) & 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act was registered against him on 18th January, 2008. On the basis whereof, he was placed under suspension.

(2.) Counsel submits that after FIR was registered on 18/1/08, but no charge sheet has been filed against the petitioner and no disciplinary inquiry has been initiated against him. In absence whereof, very action of the respondents keeping the petitioner under suspension under the Scheme of Rules, 1958 is unjust & improper, requires interference by this Court. In support of his submission, Counsel placed reliance on the judgment of apex court in K. Sukhendar Reddy Vs. State of A.P. & Anr. [1999 (6) SCC-257]. Submission made by counsel for petitioner is without merit for the reason that under R.13 of the Rules, if any criminal offence is under investigation or trial, appointing authority is competent to take decision certainly after examining the facts of each case placing an employee under suspension.

(3.) In the instant case, petitioner was trapped red handed and a case under Prevention of Corruption Act has been registered against him. This Court does not find any error in the decision of the competent authority exercising power placing the petitioner under suspension under R.13 of the Rules.