The power to suspend a government servant under Rule 13 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1958 is discretionary and should be exercised judiciously. Suspension during the pendency of an inquiry or investigation is not a punishment, but it carries a stigma and should be imposed only after careful consideration.

1. 1. This appeal under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1949 is directed against the judgment dated 16th December, 1981, passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 916/80, whereby he dismissed the writ petition.

2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as Excise Inspector Gr. II on the basis of selection by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission, on probation. While working as Excise Inspector the appellant had applied for selection to subordinate service through the Excise Department and appeared in the competitive examination held by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission in the year 1978. The appellant was declared successful at this examination on 25th September, 1979 and, on that basis, by an order dated 21st February, 1980, of the Board of Revenue for Rajasthan, Ajmer the appellant was appointed as Naib Tehsilder, in the Rajasthan Tehsildar Service, on probation for a period of two years, under Rule 34 of the Rajasthan Tehsildar Service Rules, 1956 from 3rd March, 1980, or from the date of joining Revenue Training at Tonk.

3. On 5th December, 1979, it is said that the appellant's wife committed suicide. On 19th December, 1979, appellant's father-in-law lodged an FIR against the appellant, his parents and sister. Thereupon on 31st January, 1980, the police registered a case under Section 306, IPC. On 25th February, 1980, appellant's parents were arrested. However, they were released on bail on 26th February, 1980. The appellant applied for anticipatory bail but his application was rejected. On 31st March, 1980, the appellant surrendered himself to the police and he was arrested by the police on 1st April, 1980. The appellant was remanded to police custody and on 2nd April, 1980, he was sent to judicial custody. It was on 10th April, 1980, that he was bailed out by the order of the learned Sessions Judge, Jaipur. The appellant remained on leave since 25th March, 1980 and he returned on duty on 14th April 1980.

4. As the appellant was facing investigation in the aforesaid criminal case, he could not join the training on 15th March, 1980. On 21st April, 1980 the appellant applied to the Board of Revenue for seeking permission to join even though he was required to join latest by 15th March, 1980. The Board of Revenue, however, considered his case and allowed the appellant to join the training. A copy of the letter of the Board of Revenue, dated 21st April, 1980 was sent to the Excise Commissioner by the Board of Revenue. After getting the aforesaid order from the Board of Revenue, the appellant approached the Excise Commissioner to relieve him from his duty for joining the training at Tonk. An application to this effect was also moved on 26th April, 1980. A telegram was sent on 27th April, 1980, but the Excise Commissioner did not pass any order. Contrary to it, on 21st April, 1980, the Excise Commissioner passed an order placing him under suspension. In pursuance to the order of suspension, the District Excise Officer asked the appellant to hand over the charge. The charge was accordingly handed over on 6th May, 1980. Once again on 9th May, 1980, the appellant requested the Excise Commissioner to relieve him for joining the Rajasthan Tehsildar Service Training; but the appellant was not relieved Faced with this difficulty, the appellant filed a writ petition before this Court on 12 May, 1980. On 14th July, 1930, a show cause notice was issued to the respondents. Respondent No. 2, on 14th-15th July, 1980, by an order cancelled the appellant's appointment to Rajasthan Tehsildar Service. In short, he cancelled the order dated 21st February 1980, by which he was appointed to the Rajasthan Tehsildar Service, on the ground that the appellant had failed to join the training. Again, faced with the new problem, the appellant moved an application seeking an amendment in the writ petition and the writ petition was allowed to be amended b