KANTA BHATNAGAR, J. - (1.) IN this petition under Art, 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner had challenged the legality of the order Ex. P/2 dated May 26, 1984 by which he was placed under suspension and Dx. P/4, the order dated March 19, 1985 by which the powers conferred upon the Director General & INspector General of Police, Rajasthan, in exercise of powers under sub-rule (1) of Rule 15 of Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1958 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the' Rules) were made effective retrospectively from December 6, 1879.
(2.) THE petitioner was appointed by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission (for short the RPSC) on the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police in the cadre of Rajasthan Police Service by Ex. P/l, the order dated June 6, 1977 Upon allegation of corruption he was placed under suspension by Ex. P/2. the order dated May 25, 1984 passed by the Director General and Inspector of Police Rajasthan. The petitioner feeling aggrieved by the order of his suspension has invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court with the averments that, his work had been found throughout satisfactory and there was no reason for suspending him That, the Director General and Inspector General of Police, not being his appointing authority, could not have passed the order of suspension under R. 13 of the Rules, the legality of the order has also been challenged on the ground that his head quarter had been fixed and he has been directed not to leave his head-quarter without obtaining permission from the Deputy Inspector General of Police Rajasthan, Jaipur. Notice at the admission stage was issued to the non-petitioners Mr. L. S. Udawat, Additional Government Advocate put in appearance on behalf of the non-petitioners At the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner and not objected by the learned Additional Government Advocate, the petition was heard for final disposal. Mr. P. P. Chaudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner strenuously contended that the State Government is the appointing authority for the petitioner and the Director General and I. G. police does not fall in the category of the authorities mentioned in R. 13 of the Rules so as to enable him to exercise the power under that Rule. Mr. Chaudhary referred to the Notification dated October 31, 1977 providing that in case of the State Services Officers the State Government is the appointing authority competent to place the officers of that cadre under suspension. The Notification also makes it clear that the proposals for his suspension are to be moved by the Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms to the Chief Minister of State through the Chief Secretary. According to Mr. Chaudhary the provisions contained in the Notification are of mandatory nature and as this procedure has not been followed in the present case the order of suspension Ex. P/2 deserves to be quashed. In the reply filed on behalf of the non-petitioners the details of the allegation against the petitioner necessitating the order of suspension have been given. It has been stated that the Circular dated October 31, 1977 is only a guidance to the authorities and is not of mandatory nature.
(3.) MR. Udawat argued that vide Ex. P/4 the Director General and I. G. of Police has been authorised to impose penalties specified in R. 14 (1) (2) of the Rules on members of Rajasthan Police Service and therefore, by virtue of the decision of the Government appearing at end of sub-rule (1) of R 13 of the Rules he became authorised to place the petitioner under suspension. The order of suspension Ex. P/4 according to MR. Udawat being in accordance with the provisions of the Rules should not cause any grievance to the petitioner. This is an admitted position that the State Govt. is the appointing authority of the petitioner who belongs to the cadre of Rajasthan Police Service. R. 13 of the Rules deals with the suspension of a Government Servant and the portion relevant for the present purpose reads as under : - R. 13. Suspension - (1) The Appointing Authority of any authority to which it is subordinate or any other authority empowered by the Government in that behalf may place a Government Servant under suspension. (a) Where a 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: Provided that where the order of suspension is made by a lower than the Appointing Authority, such authority shall forth with report to the Appointing Authority the circumstances in which the order was made. ;