SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1994 Supreme(Pat) 255

PATNA HIGH COURT
K.Venkataswami and B.P.Singh JJ.
Ganesh Ram
Versus
State Of Bihar
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 1552 of 1994 ;
Decided On : JULY 19, 1994

Headnote:Constitution of India, Art 226 & 227-departmental enquiry-holding of head quarters of the delinquent changed on receipt of complaint against some of them-whether amounts to transfer-requirement of signing attendance register daily not necessary-while placing an employee under suspension it is open to the employer to change the Head quarters-however the employer can not act arbitrarily and unreasonably and if it appears to the court that the action is arbitrary, unreasonable, malafide or vindictive. it is open to the court to quash such an order-in the instant case names of only four suspended employees have been mentioned-the mere allegation, without any thing more, is not sufficient even assuming that some suspended employees may have indulged in activities prejudicial to public interest would not justify an action against all the suspended employees-direction given to the Managing Director to pass fresh order in respect of each petitioner with regard to fixing of their head quarters within six weeks-CWJC No. 10106/92 disposed on 21.1.94 ref & rel. on. (Paras 4, 6, 8, 9 & 10)

Judgment

B.P.Singh, J.

1. The petitioners herein, 18 in number, have prayed for quashing of the order No. 11 dated 13-1-1994, the (Annexure-7) whereby the head-quarters of the petitioners have been changed during the period of their suspension. They have also prayed for a direction or order to the respondents not to compel the petitioners to sign the attendance register at their respective head-quarters during the period of suspension.

2. The facts as appear from the writ petition are as follows:

Petitioners 1 and 2 were working as Forester, petitioner No. 18 as Tractor Khalasi and the other petitioners as Forest Guard, and were posted at various stations in the Champaran Forest Project Division-2, Bettiah. The different stations at which the petitioners were posted fall within the jurisdiction of four police stations. The petitioners have been placed under suspension in connection with criminal cases and disciplinary proceedings initiated against them. The case against them is that rather than protecting the forest they indulged in illegal activities in collusion with the local population and other Government officials in illegally transporting the fallen timber from the forest in question. The allegations disclose that large scale felling of trees has taken place within their jurisdictions, and they had failed to report the matter to higher authorities. It is alleged that the facts discovered in the course of inquiry point to their complicity in the illegal felling of trees in collusion with others. It is also not disputed that criminal cases have been registered against them for various offences under the Indian Penal Code and the Forest Act. It is also not in dispute that disciplinary proceedings have been initiated against the petitioners for the misconduct alleged. The respondents assert that their illegal activities have resulted in severe loss to the State Exchequer, apart from denuding the forest.

3. In those circumstance the petitioners were placed under suspension, and separate orders were passed placing them under suspension. These orders have been annexed as Annexure-6 series, the Project Director while placing the petitioners under suspension fixed their head-quarters at the office of the Project Deputy Director, Champaran, Forest Project Division-1, Bettiah. The case of the petitioners is that Bettiah is at a distance of about 100 K.M. from the places where the petitioners were posted before they were placed under suspension. In obedience to the orders of suspension, the petitioners reported to the head-quarters fixed in the suspension orders and were being paid their subsistence allowance according to rules. However, the Chief Conservator of Forest-com-Managing Director, of the respondent Bihar State Forest Development Corporation Ltd, a Government Company, issued the impugned office order No. 11 dated 13, 1.1994, changing the head-quarters of the petitioners during the period of their suspension. The head-quarters of the petitioners have been sought to be fixed at different places such as Patna, Muzaffarpur, Purnea, Deoghar, Bhagalpur and Gaya which are more than 300 K.M. away from Bettiah. The petitioners are required to sign attendance register everyday at their respective head-quarters even though they are under suspension. The petitioners contend that the change of head-quarters during the period of their suspension amounts to an order of transfer and is not permissible. They also contend that they will have to incur heavy expenditure in attending the departmental proceeding as also the criminal proceedings pending against them, if they have to travel all the distance to take part in these proceedings. On these facts the petitioners have prayed that the order changing their head-quarters-Annexure 7, as also the direction to them to mark their attendance at the head-quarters be quashed.

4. A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of, respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4. In the counter-affidavit it is asserted tha






Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top