V.K. Shukla, J. - (1.) PETITIONER has approached this Court for following relief: (i) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the suspension order dated 15.8.2010 passed by the Respondent No. 2 against the Petitioner (Annexure No. 2) to the writ petition). (ii) Issue any other writ order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. (iii) To award cost of this petition.
(2.) BRIEF background of the case is that Petitioner has been performing and discharging his duties as constable. First information report has been lodged against the Petitioner on 15.8.2010 under Sections 376, 452 I.P.C. being Case Crime No. 150 of 2010, P.S. Rejore, District Etah. Petitioner was granted bail on 17.9.2010 . In the said criminal case, charge sheet in question has been filed and the matter earlier had been pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Etah. Petitioner has stated that the matter has been committed to the Court of Session, thereafter wherein on 7.10.2010 charges have been framed. Petitioner has stated that departmental charge sheet has also been issued on 7.10.2010 in order to initiate proceeding under Rule 14(1) of U.P. Police Officers of the Subordinate Rank (Punishment and Appeals) Rules, 1991 and as criminal trial is on going, departmental proceeding be stayed. At this juncture present writ petition has been filed with the prayer mentioned above. Sri S.K. Mishra, Advocate, learned Counsel for the Petitioner contended with vehemence that in the present case, criminal case and departmental proceeding are based on same set of fact and same evidence, as such continuance of departmental inquiry, is not at all justifiable and consequentially directive be issued for withholding departmental proceeding till criminal trial is not over. For this preposition he has also placed reliance on Regulation 492 and 493 of U.P. Police Regulations as well as judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case Capt. M. Paul Anthony v. Bharat Coal Mines Ltd. : 1999 (3) S.C.C. 679 and : 2004 (7) S.C.C. 27 State Bank of India v. R.B. Sharma. and the judgment of this Court in the case of Prafulla Kumar v. S.T. Mukhawar Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 36479 of 2005 decided on 1.4.2011.
(3.) LEARNED Standing counsel on the other hand contended that there is no bar in simultaneous proceeding i.e. criminal proceeding and departmental proceeding can go on simultaneously as area of both departmental proceeding and criminal prosecution are altogether different and as such there is no occasion for staying departmental proceedings such writ petition be dismissed.;