Allahabad High Court
Robish Kumar vs State Of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy.Deptt. Of ... on 1 December, 2020
Author: Rajan Roy
Bench: Rajan Roy
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ? Court No. - 6 Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 22838 of 2020 Petitioner :- Robish Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy.Deptt. Of Home & Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- M.P. Raju Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J.
Heard.
The petitioner was placed under suspension vide order dated 14.08.2020 impugned herein. It is said that a preliminary enquiry was instituted in the matter on 25.08.2020 and the matter is pending though the date of its initiation is not very clear. The allegation against the petitioner is of dereliction of duty and misbehavior with his Senior Officers. As regards, the contention of the petitioner that he cannot be suspended during pendency of the preliminary enquiry, this is against the Full Bench decision of this Court in the case of Rajbeer Singh Vs. State of U.P. and others reported in 2011 (1) 18 wherein an earlier Full Bench decision in the case of Sahroz Anwar Khan has been affirmed wherein it has been held that there is no prohibition in passing of suspension order during pendency of preliminary enquiry in view of Rule 17 (1) (a) of Uttar Pradesh Police Officers of the Subordinate Ranks (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991. However, whether a suspension order passed during pendency of preliminary enquiry is valid or not is another question which has to be answered according to the test as laid down by the Larger Bench in State of U.P. Vs. Jay Singh Dixit and others i.e. when on an objective consideration of the material the appointing authority considers the case as one which would lead to a departmental enquiry then suspension would be justified irrespective of the fact whether a preliminary enquiry has been initiated or if initiated has not been completed. Meaning thereby, there has to be an objective consideration of material by the appointing / suspending authority in this regard.
Considering the facts of the case, especially allegations against the petitioner, this is not a fit case for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India at this stage.
However, there is no reason as to why the preliminary enquiry which was initiated prior to 25.08.2020 is being kept pending, if it is so. If the same has not been concluded, let it be concluded within one month. If it is not so concluded, it shall be open for the petitioner to approach this Court again challenging his continued suspension. However, if the preliminary enquiry is concluded the consequences shall follow accordingly, as per law.
With these observations the petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 1.12.2020 AS Rathore