(1) The seminal question involved in this writ petition is whether the 3rd respondent Collector, Koria is empowered under Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Classification Control & Appeal) Rules, 1966 (henceforth Rules, 1966) to place the petitioner under suspension and to institute departmental enquiry against him.

(2) The required facts, necessary for disposal of the writ petition in nutshell, are as under:-

(2.1) The petitioner is a Sub Engineer working in the office of Executive Engineer, Rural Engineering Services Division, Baikunthpur, District Korea.

(2.2) The State of Chhattisgarh by its order dated 16.12.2002 vide Annexure P/5 sent the petitioner on deputation to the Department of Panchayat and Rural Development, thereafter, the Department of Panchayat and Rural Development, by its order dated 24.12.2002 (Annexure P-6) posted him as Sub Engineer at Janpad Panchayat, Manendragarh, District Koria.

(2.3) Third respondent Collector, Koria, by its order dated 27.02.2003 vide (Annexure P-1) placed the petitioner under suspension and further instituted departmental enquiry against him in accordance with Rule 14 of the Rules, 1966 vide (Annexure P-2).

(2.4) The petitioner has questioned the legality and validity of the order passed by the Collector placing him under suspension and instituting regular departmental enquiry against him under the Rules, 1966 in this writ petition filed on the sole ground that Collector is neither his Disciplinary authority nor Appointing Authority and, therefore, the Collector was not empowered either to place him under suspension or institute departmental enquiry and, therefore, the order of suspension (Annexure P-1) and order instituting departmental enquiry (Annexure P-2) against him deserves to be quashed as passed by the incompetent authority, and accordingly, prayed for appropriate writ be issued against the respondents quashing both the orders i.e. Annexure P-1 & Annexure P-2.

(2.5) On rule being issued, the respondent-State has filed its return stating inter alia that petitioner is a Class III employee and vide Annexure R-1 by notification dated 23.05.1996, the State Government has delegated the power to the Collectors to place the Class III & IV employees under suspension and to impose minor penalty under Rule 10 of the Rules, 1966 and, therefore, respondent has rightly placed the petitioner under suspension and instituted departmental enquiry against him and, as such, the writ petition deserves to be dismissed.

(2.6) Questioning the orders dated 27.02.2003 (Annexure P-1) & 17.03.2003 (Annexure P-2), instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner herein.

(2.7) The petitioner, after filing of the instant writ petition, has filed application for taking documents on record and filed copy of order dated 29.05.1998 (Annexure P-10) passed by the then State of Madhya Pradesh directing that Sub Engineer appointed on the pay scale of Rs. 2,000-2900 declaring them as Gazetted Officer, Class II and copy of the same has been endorsed to the petitioner herein; and the petitioner has also filed copy of service Book (Annexure P/11), in which, there is an endorsement to the effect that pursuant to the order dated 29.05.1998 passed by the then, State of Madhya Pradesh, the petitioner (Sub Engineer) is declared as Gazzetted Officer, Class-II.

(3) Appearing for the petitioner, Shri V.G. Tamaskar, learned counsel would submit that the petitioner was appointed on the pay scale of Rs. 2,000-2,900 by the then competent authority with effect from 21.12.1997, which was duly recorded in his service record and, as such, by order dated 29.5.1998, Sub Engineers appointed on the pay scale of Rs.2000-2900 has been declared as Gazzetted Officer, Class II by the then State of Madhya Pradesh, which has duly been endorsed on his service record vide Annexure P-12 and, therefore, the order of the State Government dated 23rd May, 1995 vide Annexure R-1 delegating the power to the Collectors to place Class III & IV em