2011 Supreme(Raj) 668
[Citation : 2011(4) RLW 3552 (Raj.)]
(Rajasthan High Court)
Jaipur Bench
Durga Ram Mali Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (Bhagwati, J.)
HON'BLE MAHESH BHAGWATI, J.
Durga Ram Mali
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors.
S.B. Civil Writ Petition Nos. 4780, 4781 & 4779 of 2011, decided on 18.07.2011
Bharat Saini, for Petitioner(s);
Jinesh Jain, Government Counsel, for State of Rajasthan;
Dr. P.C. Jain, for Respondents No. 2 and 3
Headnote:Rajasthan Municipality Act, 2009, Sec. 39(6) — Placing the members of Municipal Board under suspension — Petitioners made encroachment on Govt. Land and also caused others to commit trespass over it — Employees of the Board prevented them from making encroachment — They abused jostled and gave beating to them — Deterred them from discharging their official duty as public servant — S.D.O. conducted preliminary enquiry, gave them notice who voluntarily participated in enquiry, filed reply and also put their defence — The State Govt. also issued show cause notice before passing suspension order — Held — The petitioners were found guilty — The report was sent to the State Govt. and the Govt. invoking its powers conferred u/S. 39(6) of the Act, placed them under suspension till conclusion of enquiry or passing of final order — Impugned orders are just and proper — Warrant no intervention. (Paras 7, 8,15 to 17)
Writ petitions dismissed and stay applications disposed of.
jktLFkku uxjikfydk vf/kfu;e] 2009] /kkjk 39¼6½ & uxj ikfydk cksMZ ds lnL;ksa dks fuyEcuk/khu j[kuk & izkFkhZx.k us ljdkjh Hkwfe ij vfrØe.k fd;k rFkk nwljksa ls Hkh ml ij vfrpkj djok;k & cksMZ ds deZpkfj;ksa us mudks vfrØe.k djus ls jksdk & mUgksaus xkyh xykSt] /kDdk eqDdh rFkk ihVkbZ dh & tu lsod ds :i esa vius drZO; dk fuoZgu djus ls mUgsa jksdk x;k & mi[k.M vf/kdkjh us vkjfEHkd tkap dh] mUgsa uksfVl fn;k ftUgksaus LosfPNd :i ls tkap esa Hkkx fy;k] tokc is'k fd;k rFkk viuh izfrj{kk Hkh is'k dh & jkT; ljdkj us fuyEcu vkns'k ikfjr djus ls iwoZ uksfVl Hkh tkjh fd;k & vfHkfu/kkZfjr & izkFkhZx.k nks"kh ik;s x;s & fjiksVZ jkT; ljdkj dks izsf"kr dh xbZ Fkh rFkk jkT; ljdkj us vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 39¼6½ ds rgr iznRr 'kfDr;ksa dk voyEcu ysdj mUgsa tkap ds lekiu gksus ;k vfUre vkns'k ikfjr djus rd fuyEcuk/khu j[kk & vk{ksfir vkns'k U;k;ksfpr ,oa leqfpr gS & gLr{ksi okaNuh; ughaA ¼in la[;k 7] 8] 15 ls 17½
;kfpdk [kkfjt dh LVs vkosnu fuLrkfjr fd;kA
2. By way of the instant writ petitions, the petitioners have sought the following relief:
“i) by an appropriate writ, order or direction the impugned suspension order dated 30.3.2011 (annex.4) passed by respondent no.2 whereby the membership of the municipal board of the petitioner has been suspended, may kindly be quashed and set aside declaring the same as illegal, arbitrary, unjustified and against the provisions of law as well as evidence available on record.
ii) Any other appropriate order or directions, which this Hon'ble Court considers expedient, just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be granted in favour of the petitioners; and
iii)Cost of this writ petition may kindly be awarded in favour of the humble petitioners.”
3. Adumbrated in brief, the facts of the case are that on 21st January, 2011, Collector, Churu asked Shri Ranjeet Singh Rathore, the Executive Officer, Municipal Board, Sardar Shahar to go to bus stand, Sardar Shahar and stop some persons who were likely to encroach upon the government land situated at the south east of bus sand. Collector, Churu also directed him to put the board of Municipality on the land. Collector had sent the S.I. of Municipal Board also who found there Inder Chand, Raj Karan and many other persons including the petitioners who were encroaching upon the govt. land by laying stone slabs and fencing the same with barbed wire. The complainant immediately approached Tehsildar and asked for help. He took the Municipality staff alongwith him on the spot where the staff of the Municipality prevented them from committing trespass, but in return, they started abusing the staff and insulted the sweepers of Municipality by calling generic or communal abuses. They also gave them beating and jostled with the staff. The complainant Ranjeet Singh lodged the FIR No. 25/2011 with Police Station, Sardar Shahar and the police commenced the investigation.
4. SDO, Sardar Shahar conducted the preliminary enquiry for the alleged act of the petitioners deterring the employees of Municipality, Sardar Shahar from discharging their official duties as public servants who had gone to prevent the encroachment to be made by some of the members of Municipal Board of Sardar Shahar and other persons. SDO, Sardar Shahar, having recorded the statements of 10 to 12 employees of Municipality and affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioners and carefully perused the entire evidence collected by him, found the petitioners guilty of encroaching upon the valuable land of the Government and deterring employees of Municipality from discharging their official duty as public servant. SDO, Sardar Shahar also found that the petitioners and others abused the employees, gave a beating and jostled them when they prevented the petitioners from encroaching upon the government land and causing others also to commit trespass over the said land. On the basis of the preliminary report, the State Government vide its order dated 30th march, 2011 placed the petitioners under suspension, who happened to be the members of the municipal Board, Sardar Shahar.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as also the learned Government counsel appearing for the State and carefully perused the relevant material available on record.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners canvassed that the impugned orders of placing the petitioners under suspension are illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the Municipal laws. The First Information Report lodged by the complainant Ranjeet Singh was totally misconceived. There was no order in writing given by Collector directing the complainant to go on the spot and prevent encroachment. The contents of First Information Report reveals that the complaina