Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
State Of Rajasthan vs Deepak Kumar Verma S/O Shri Bajrang Lal ... on 28 September, 2021
Bench: Sabina, Manoj Kumar Vyas
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 54/2020
In
S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5598/2019
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Director General Of Police,
Government Of Rajasthan, Police Head Quarter, Lalkothi,
Jaipur.
2. The Inspector General Of Police, Kota Range, Kota, (Raj.)
3. The Superintendent Of Police, Kota City, (Raj.)
----Appellants-Respondents
Versus Deepak Kumar Verma S/o Shri Bajrang Lal Verma, Aged About 43 Years, Resident Of House No. F-4, Behind RTO Office, Chattarpura, Kota.
----Petitioner-Respondent For Appellant(s) : Mr. Prakhar Gupta, Advocate with Ms. Harshita Thakral, Advocate for Mr. V. B. Sharma, Additional Advocate General For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sandeep Saxena, Advocate HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR VYAS Order 28/09/2021 Learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for the respondent have submitted that the present appeal is liable to be disposed of in terms of decision given by a co-ordinate bench of this Court in D. B. Special Appeal Writ No. 1111/2019 titled as "State of Rajasthan & Ors. Vs. Manvendra Singh", decided on 04.02.2020.
Operative part of the order passed by a co-ordinate bench of this Court dated 04.02.2020, reads as under:-
"13. As laid down by the Supreme Court in Sanjiv Ranjan's case (supra), ordinarily, when there is an allegation of defalcation of the money, the delinquent (Downloaded on 01/10/2021 at 09:20:17 PM) (2 of 2) [SAW-54/2020] employee have to be kept away from the establishment till the charges are finally disposed of. In our considered opinion, the charge of demand of bribe, that too, by a police officer is also a serious charge and therefore, the matter with regard to revocation of suspension order of such Government servant needs to be appropriately assessed by the authority concerned. We are firmly of the opinion that the respondent does not deserve indulgence by this Court so as to revoke the suspension order straightaway where the authority empowered under the Rules of 1958 has not even applied its mind to the facts and circumstances of the case as to whether the suspension of the respondent deserves to be revoked or not.
14. In view of the discussion above, the order impugned passed by the learned Single Judge to the extent of revocation of suspension order deserves to be set aside and the matter deserves to be remanded to the authority concerned for consideration afresh in terms of Rule 13 (5) of the Rules of 1958uninfluenced by the circulars issued by the State Government as aforesaid.
15. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. The order impugned passed by the learned Single Judge to the extent of revocation of suspension order is set aside. The matter is remanded to the District Superintendent of Police, District Sawai Madhopur to consider the application of the respondent for revocation of suspension order afresh in accordance with law as discussed above. The entire exercise for disposal of the application seeking revocation of suspension order shall be concluded within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. No order as to costs."
Accordingly, in view of the submissions made by learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for the respondent, this appeal is disposed of in terms of the order dated 04.02.2020, passed in D. B. Special Appeal Writ No. 1111/2019 titled as "State of Rajasthan & Ors. Vs. Manvendra Singh".
(MANOJ KUMAR VYAS),J (SABINA),J
Pooja /47
(Downloaded on 01/10/2021 at 09:20:17 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)