- (1.) In this case, petitioner is challenging the suspension order dated 8/9-2-1994. The said suspension order was passed in contemplation of departmental inquiry by the Chairman cum Managing Director, RFC which is evident from the order Annex.P/1. As per petitioner, till today no disciplinary proceedings are initiated against the petitioner.
(2.) Learned counsel for respondents submitted that four criminal cases were registered against the petitioner for the offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act. As per petitioner, out of four cases, he has been acquitted in two cases and two cases are still pending. Learned counsel for the petitioner while inviting attention of the Court towards the judgment dated 8/11/2005 (Annex.2) passed by Special Judge, (Anti Corruption Act), Udaipur submitted that as per the finding of the criminal Court, there is no evidence against the petitioner for prosecuting him for the offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act and the petitioner has been acquitted of the charges levelled against him.
(3.) As per the petitioner, during the pendency of writ petition, one more criminal case was decided vide judgment dated 23/3/2007. Further it is submitted that all the four criminal cases are identical with regard to allegation levelled against the petitioner, therefore, no useful purpose will be served to keep the petitioner under suspension and, thus, respondents are under obligation to revoke the suspension order, which was passed in 1994 and till today no disciplinary proceedings are initiated against him.;