JUDGMENT

Ashok Kumar Gaur, J. - The instant petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 06.12.2019 passed by the Director and Joint Secretary, Local Self Government placing the petitioner under suspension from the post of Chairman, Municipal Council, Karauli invoking Section 39(6) of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 2009 (hereinafter shall be referred to as "the Act, 2009").

2. The facts, pleaded in nutshell, are that the petitioner was duly elected as Chairman, Municipal Council, Karauli, District Karauli in August, 2015 and stated to be discharging his duties with utmost sincerity and honesty and there was no complaint of any misconduct against the petitioner in last four years except some false complaints, said to be made by the ward members of the opposite political party.

3. The petitioner has pleaded that he was in receipt of the letter dated 06.12.2019 issued by the respondent No.2 stating that the petitioner was guilty of misconduct in discharge of his duties, as per the comments received from the Commissioner, Municipal Council, Karauli and the factual report received from the Superintendent of Police, Karauli implicating the petitioner in FIR No.414/2019 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Karauli for the offences under Section 323, 189 and 384 IPC. It was informed to the petitioner that he had committed serious misconduct in discharge of his duties and further has misused his position as Chairman and as such, the above acts of the petitioner were covered under the provisions of Section 39(1)(d) of the Act, 2009 and the State Government had decided to conduct a judicial enquiry against the petitioner under Section 39(3) of the Act, 2009 and further the respondents invoked powers conferred under Section 39(6) of the Act, 2009 and decided to suspend the petitioner from the post of Chairman, Municipal Council, Karauli with immediate effect.

4. The petitioner has pleaded that the impugned order dated 06.12.2019 has been issued maliciously without following due process of law with the intention to target him under the political vendetta. The petitioner has pleaded that the FIR No.414/2019 registered against him at the Police Station Kotwali, District Karauli is still under investigation and only with an ulterior motive, the impugned suspension order was passed.

5. The petitioner has pleaded that he was under the bonafide belief that procedure, as set out and contemplated under Section 39 of the Act, 2009, would be followed by the respondents and he would be given an opportunity of hearing substantiating his explanation and the complaint was to be inquired by the State Government or by an officer and report was to be prepared accordingly.

6. The petitioner has pleaded that the criminal case which is under investigation, leveling allegations against him, was first required to be proved and without affording any opportunity of hearing and without following due process of law, as contemplated in the Act, 2009, impugned order has been passed.

7. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner Mr.Rajendra Prasad has vehemently argued that neither any preliminary enquiry was conducted against the petitioner nor any show cause notice was issued to the petitioner before passing the impugned suspension order.

8. Counsel further submitted that reports of the Commissioner, Municipal Council, Karauli and Superintendent of Police, Karauli cannot be the relevant material to come to the conclusion for taking any action under Section 39(6) of the Act, 2009 for placing the petitioner under suspension.

9. Mr.Rajendra Prasad, learned Senior Counsel submitted that as per the law laid down by this Court in the case of Jan Mohd. Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors., (1992) 2 WLC(Raj) 463 , it was incumbent that only on the basis of the complaint made about working of a person, which may be covered by sub-section (1)(a) of the Section 39 of the Act, 2009, no suspension can take place. The complaint has to be