Allahabad High Court
Hoshiyar Singh vs State Of U.P. And Others on 26 July, 2010
Author: Shishir Kumar
Bench: Shishir Kumar
Court No. - 38 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 43145 of 2010 Petitioner :- Hoshiyar Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others Petitioner Counsel :- A. C. Tiwari Respondent Counsel :- C. S. C. Hon'ble Shishir Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel.
Petitioner is aggrieved by the order of suspension dated 9th of July 2010. According to petitioner there cannot be any suspension unless and until any inquiry is pending or contemplated. The contention of the petitioner is that the charges levelled against him are not such which can led to the major punishment like termination, dismissal or removal, therefore, the order of suspension is not warranted. Petitioner has placed reliance on Rule 4 of Uttar Pradesh Servant (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1999, which provides that unless and until the competent authority / disciplinary authority is not sure that the charges which were levelled against the person concerned can led to the major punishment, then there could not be any order of suspension.
On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel submits that according to Rules, petitioner may be correct, but from the perusal of the order of suspension, it is clear that Inquiry Officer has been appointed and has been directed to submit a report within a period of 15 days, therefore, the contention of the petitioner will not be applicable in the present case.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel. The contention of the petitioner regarding contemplation and pending inquiry is correct. There is no dispute to this effect that unless and until an inquiry is contemplated or pending, no order of suspension can be passed, but in the present case as the Inquiry Officer has also been appointed and he has been directed to submit the report within a period of 15 days, therefore, I am of the opinion that the disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner be completed within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of the order, after affording full opportunity to him, in case the petitioner co- operates in the inquiry. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, I am of the opinion that till the decision is taken in the disciplinary inquiry, the order of suspension will be kept in abeyance .
Writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
No order as to costs.
Order Date :- 26.7.2010 vks