Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Ashok Kumar Barolia S/O Shri Chhotu Ram ... vs State Of Rajasthan on 23 September, 2021
Author: Arun Bhansali
Bench: Arun Bhansali
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10774/2021
Ashok Kumar Barolia S/o Shri Chhotu Ram Barolia, Aged About
52 Years, R/o Soni Colony, Ward No. 10, Srimadhopur Sikar
Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary,
Department Of Home, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Govt.
Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Director General Of Police, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
3. Inspector General Of Police, Jaipur Range, Jaipur.
4. Superintendent Of Police, District Sikar.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Prem Chand Dewanda.
For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI
Order
23/09/2021
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved against the order dated 8.8.2019 (Annex.2), whereby the petitioner has been placed under suspension.
The petitioner made a representation (Annex.5), inter alia, indicating that already challan against the petitioner has been filed and despite passage of sufficiently long time, the petitioner has not been reinstated and, therefore, the order of suspension requires review and the petitioner deserves to be reinstated.
Learned counsel for the petitioner with reference to judgment in Manvendra Singh v. State of Raj. & Ors.: SBCW No. 4276/2018, decided on 21.12.2018 submitted that the Court in the said judgment has dealt with the powers of the disciplinary (Downloaded on 23/09/2021 at 10:18:45 PM) (2 of 2) [CW-10774/2021] authority under Rule 13(5) of the Rules of 1958 and appellate authority under Rule 22 of the Rules of 1958 and has held that the various circulars issued by the State Government laying down limitation to examine the revocation of suspension order after a period of three years from the date of suspension/after a period of one year from the date, the charge-sheet has been filed, was not justified and it was open for the authorities to examine the case for revocation of suspension even prior to the said periods fixed in the circular.
In the over all fact circumstances of the case as projected as well as the law laid down by this Court in the case of Manvendra Singh (supra), the writ petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of. The petitioner may make a representation and the respondent No.3-disciplinary authority is directed to decide the representation to be made by the petitioner (Annex.5) in light of the judgment in the case of Manvendra Singh (supra).
The needful may be done by the respondent No.3 within a period of four weeks from the date a copy of this order is placed by the petitioner before the said authority.
The petitioner would be free to file a fresh representation alongwith requisite documents before the disciplinary authority.
(ARUN BHANSALI),J SUMIT SHARMA /62 (Downloaded on 23/09/2021 at 10:18:45 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)