Sandeep Mehta, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
(2.) BY way of the instant writ petition, the petitioner Shravan Kumar Bidiyasar has approached this Court assailing the legality and validity of the order Annex. 3 dated 22.1.2014 whereby, he was placed under suspension. The language of the order Annex. 3 is relevant for the disposal of the writ petition and is being reproduced herein below: - "Whereas a criminal proceeding is contemplated against Sh. Shravan Ram Bidiyasar, AEN Agn. XEN (DD -II), AVVNL, Udaipur. Now, therefore, Sh. Shravan Ram Bidiyasar, AEN Agn. XEN is hereby placed under suspension with immediate effect. During the suspension period, his headquarter is hereby fixed at office of the Superintending Engineer (O&M), AVVNL, Chittorgarh, where he will mark his attendance daily. During the suspension period he shall be entitled to draw subsistence allowance admissible under the rules." It is the admitted case of the parties that an FIR No. 12/2014 came to be registered at A.C.B., Udaipur on 16.1.2014 wherein the petitioner was also named as an accused. However, undisputedly Laxman Lilani, Assistant Engineer in A.V.V.N.L. was apprehended red handed with the bribe money. The petitioner is arraigned as an accused in the F.I.R. as a conspirator. Be that as it may. It is further an admitted case of the parties that neither the petitioner has been arrested nor any sanction has been sought for the petitioner's prosecution in the said case till date. The competent authority passed the order Annex. 3 placing the petitioner under suspension in reference to Clause 9 of R.S.E.B. Employees (Classification, Control & Appeal) Regulations, 1962 (for short, herein after referred to as the CCA Regulations) which is reproduced herein below for sake of ready reference: - "9. Suspension: (1) The appointing authority or any authority to which it is subordinate or any other authority empowered by the Board in that behalf may place a Nigam employee under suspension: (a) Where the disciplinary proceedings against him is contemplated or is pending; or (b) Where a case against him in respect of any criminal offence is under investigation or trial. Decision under this regulation will be communicated to the employee by the disciplinary authority or the officer authorized. (Substituted vide order No. 591 dt. 25 -07 -07 (F & R -420). (2) An employee of the Board who is detained in custody on a criminal charge or otherwise, for a period exceeding forty eight hours, shall be deemed to have been suspended w.e.f. the date of detention by an order of the Appointing Authority and shall remain under suspension until further orders. (3) Where the penalty of dismissal, removal or compulsory retirement from service imposed upon a Board employee under suspension is set -aside in appeal or on review under these Regulations and the case is remitted for further enquiry or action or with any other directions, the order of his suspension shall be deemed to have continued in force on and from the date of the original order of dismissal, removal or compulsory retirement and shall remain in force until further orders. (4) Where a penalty of dismissal, removal or compulsory retirement from service imposed upon a Board's employee is set -aside or declared or rendered void in consequence or by a decision of a Court of Law and the Disciplinary Authority on a consideration of the circumstances of the case, decides to hold a further enquiry against him on the allegations on which the penalty of dismissal, removal or compulsory retirement was originally imposed, the Board's employee shall be deemed to have been placed under suspension by the Appointing Authority from the date of the original order of dismissal, removal or compulsory retirement and shall continue to remain under suspension until further orders. (5) An order of suspension made or deemed to have been made under this Regulation may at any time be revoked by the authority which made, or is deemed to have made, the order or by any authority to which that authority is subordinate."
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner contends that the impugned order clearly reflects that the petitioner was being placed under suspension in contemplation of a criminal proceeding. As per him, the employee cannot be placed under suspension merely in contemplation of criminal proceedings. He further submits that if Clause 9 of the C.C.A. Regulations is applied in its letter and spirit, then it is evident that the respondents have placed the petitioner under suspension in total contravention thereof. As per him, since the suspension order was not passed on the ground of pendency of investigation or trial of a criminal case, but rather was issued in contemplation of a criminal case, the order does not answer to the requirements of the Statutory provision and, therefore, cannot be sustained.;