- (1.) THE petitioner is an overseer in the Irrigation Department of the Government of Uttar Pradesh. He was posted at Kalagarh Division in the District of Bijnor and was suspended on 22-3-1969. The suspension order is con tained in annexure 1 to the writ peti tion. It purports to be signed by the Additional Chief Engineer. This writ petition has been filed for the quashing of that order.
(2.) AFTER the suspension of the petitioner which order of suspension was served on him on 24-3-1969, it was only on 29-10-1969 that a charge-sheet was framed against him and his contention is that the suspension order was issued without there being any basis for the passing of the same. He also challenges the order of suspension passed against him on the ground that it was passed by an authority which was not the ap pointing authority and it could be passed only by such an authority which is the Chief Engineer and not the Additional Chief Engineer. The suspension order also mentions that the petitioner will draw 1/3rd (one third) of his pay plus dearness allowance as subsistence allow ance during the period of suspension. The petitioner claims that he should be allowed his increments as due from the date of suspension and the subsistence allowance should accordingly be raised from time to time as and when the in crements fall due. A writ of mandamus also is accord ingly prayed for commanding the res pondents - State of U. P., Chief Engi neer, Additional Chief Engineer and the Chief Engineer, Ramganga River Project to allow the petitioner his annual incre ment which fell due on 1-4-1969 and naturally the other increment which fell due during the pendency of the writ peti tion. The writ petition is contested. We have, therefore, to see as to whether the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner or any of them can be accept ed.
(3.) THE first contention is that the order of suspension was not passed by the appointing authority but was pass ed by an authority who was not such an authority. The order of suspension is contained in annexure 1. It reads: "Sri Mirtunjai Singh Overseer of Ramganga Project, Kalagarh is hereby placed under suspension with immediate effect and attached to the camp of P. A. to Addl. Chief Engineer, Ramganga Pro ject, Kalagarh, He will draw 1/3 (one third) of his pay plus dearness allowance as subsist ence allowance during the period of suspension. Ravi Dutt, Addl. Chief Engineer (I. and P)" Prima facie the order has been passed by the Additional Chief Engineer (Irri gation and Power) and not by the Chief Engineer. It is not disputed that the appointing authority of the petitioner is the Chief Engineer and not the Addition al Chief Engineer. According to R. 1-A of the Punishment and Appeal Rules for subordinate service published with noti fication No. 2627/11-264, dated August 3, 1963 (as amended upto December 31, 1965) a government servant against whose conduct an inquiry is contem plated, or is proceeding, may be placed under suspension pending the conclusion of the inquiry in the discretion of the appointing authority: Provided that in the case of any government servant or class of govern ment servants, not belonging to a State Service, the appointing authority may delegate its power under this rule to the next lower authority. ;