HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Click here to view full judgement.
S.K.MAL LODHA, J. -
(1.)BY this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner, Shraini Dan seeks to quash the order (Ex. 7) dated April 16, 1983 of the Collector, Jodhpur, by which he was suspended.
(2.), It is not in dispute that the petitioner was appointed by the Collector, Banner as Patwari on July 9,1959 and, thereafter, he continued as such. The petitioner was transferred to Jodhpur district from Banner district by order of the Collector and thereafter, he was posted as Patwari in Solankiyatalla village vide order dated November 6, 1978, of the Collector, Jodhpur. For the purpose of the disposal of the writ petition, it is not necessary to re -count the facts in detail. However, it may be mentioned that the petitioner was suspended by order (Ex. 7) dated February 16, 1983 of the Collector, Jodhpur. The petitioner filed the writ petition on May 20, 1983 for quashing the order of suspension and also for payment of the arrears of the salary.
Show cause notice was issued to non -petitioners No. I to 4. Reply to the show cause notice was filed on December 2, 1983 contesting the writ petition. Along with the reply, photo copy of the charge -sheet (Ex.R 3) issued to the petitioner; photo copy of the order appointing Enquiry Officer (Ex. R 4); photo copy of the preliminary enquiry repost (Ex. R 5); photo copy of the complaint (Ex. R 6) of Sarpanch, Solankiyatalla and the photo copy of the petitioner's statement (Ex R 7) were filed. A rejoinder was filed by the petitioner. It may be stated that on January 6, 1984, learned Assistant Government Advocate sought time to seek instructions from non -petitioners No. 1 and 2 to enable him to answer the queries made by the Court. When the matter was listed in court on January 19, 1984, learned connsel for the petitioner referred to r. 17 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue (Land Records) Rules, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'). On that day also, learned I Assistant Government Advocate sought time to enable him to obtain 1. necessary instructions. The next date fixed was February 13, 1984. Mr. R.P. Dave, learned Deputy Government, on February 13, 1982, contended that the period fixed for suspension during the completion of the enquiry under Rule 17(3) of Rules, is directory. He, however, submited that he wants to argue the writ petition after calling the officer -in -charge.
(3.)TODAY Mr. S.D Vyas, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. L.S. Udawat, Assistant Government Advocate -submitted that the writ petition may be disposed of finally at the admission stage.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.