The Chief Executive Officer of a Panchayati Raj Institution cannot suspend an employee unless specifically authorized by the State Government, as the appointing authority is the Zila Parishad.

ORDER

1. One of the grounds raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is, that since Chief Executive Officer is not the appointing authority, he does not have the power to place the petitioner under suspension. In support of this argument, learned counsel for the petitioner invited Court's attention towards Section 89(6) of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act of 1994') and pointed out that appointing authority of the petitioner is Zila Parishad.

2. He highlighted that even according to Section 91 of the Act of 1994 the Chief Executive Officer can impose only two out of three minor penalties and, therefore, if an employee of Panchayati Raj Institution is to be placed under suspension, it can be done by the Zila Parishad or by the District Establishment Committee and not by the Chief Executive Officer.

3. In response to petitioner's contention, learned counsel for the respondents invited Court's attention towards Rule 336 (22) of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules of 1996') which provides for powers of Chief Executive Officer and Rule 298 of the Rules of 1996 which deals with authorities empowered to impose suspension and submitted that a conjoint reading of these provisions shows that the Chief Executive Officer is empowered to place the petitioner under suspension.

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the prima facie opinion that sub-rule (22) of Rule 336 of the Rules of 1996 only talks about 'disciplinary action' and the same cannot be read in isolation - it has to be read in context of the basic statutory provisions.

5. In the opinion of this Court unless there is a specific delegation by way of notification or otherwise by the State Government authorising the Chief Executive Officer to place an employee of the Panchayati Raj Institution under suspension as prescribed in Rule 298 of the Rules of 1996 the powers under subrule 22 of Rule 336 of the Rules of 1996 cannot be resorted to, for the purpose of placing the petitioner under suspension.

6. Matter requires consideration.

7. Hence, issue notice. Issue notice of stay application also, returnable in second week of March, 2023.

6. Meanwhile, effect and operation of the order dated 05.07.2022 shall remain stayed.