Bose, J. - (1.) This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution for an appropriate writ directing the opposite parties to cancel or withdraw certain orders passed toy the Director of Transportation directing payment of only subsistence allowance to the petitioner as a disciplinary measure during the period of the petitioner's suspension.
(2.) The case of the petitioner is that by a memorandum dated 29 June 1945 the petitioner was appointed as a sub-inspector in the Department of the Director-General, Transportation and Storage, Government of West Bengal. On 21 December 1951, the petitioner was placed under suspension pending certain allegations against him. This order of suspension further directed that the petitioner would get 25 per cent of his basic pay as subsistence allowance during the period of his suspension. On 19/21 January 1952 there was served upon the petitioner a notice to show cause as to why the petitioner should not be dismissed from service or otherwise dealt with. The charges against the petitioner were that the petitioner while attached to the movement section of the Directorate of Transportation had published a pamphlet under the title of "Bharatiya Jatiya Congresser Parinam" without obtaining the prior sanction of the Government and this was in contravention of Sub-rule (2) of Rule 20 of the Government Servants' Conduct Rules. The further charge against the petitioner was that the said publication contained criticism of the Government which was capable of embarrassing the relation between the Government and the people of India and as such the petitioner was guilty of breach of Sub-rule 1(a) of Rule 20 of the Government Servants' Conduct Rules. There was also another charge to the effect that the said publication disclosed that the petitioner had been taking part in active politics and that it was a propaganda literature relating to the general elections and this constituted a breach of Rule 23 of the Government Servants' Conduct Rules. On 25 January 1952 the petitioner made a representation replying to the said charges.
(3.) On 7/9 June 1952 the Director of Transportation however withdrew the suspension order and allowed the petitioner to resume his duties with effect from the date on which the order was served upon him. It was also stated in the said order that for the period of his suspension the petitioner would get only the subsistence allowance at the rate admissible under the rules, as a disciplinary measure and the period of his suspension would be treated as on duty. By the said order the petitioner was also warned not to take part in any political activities and his attention was drawn to Rule 23 of the Government Servants' Conduct Rules. It appears that this attitude of the Director of Transportation was taken as a result of the answer given by the petitioner to the charges which were brought against him, and inasmuch as the investigation held did not furnish adequate materials to establish all the charges.;