Back
2025 Supreme(Raj) 1851
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
FARJAND ALI, J.
Neeraj Kumar Gupta S/o Shri Dhurendra Kumar Gupta - Appellant
Versus
The State Of Rajasthan - Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4886/2024, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9529/2023, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15959/2023
Decided on : 03-01-2025
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. R.S. Choudhary
For the Respondent: Mr. N.K. Mehta, Dy.G.C.
Suspension and disciplinary actions against an employee must be based on official misconduct, not personal grievances, ensuring fairness and adherence to legal procedures.
Headnote:
(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Writ petitions challenging suspension, salary withdrawal, and charge sheet issued against a school lecturer - The court found actions taken against the petitioner were malicious and not related to official duties, violating principles of fairness and justice. (Paras 1, 7, 10)
(B) Employment Law - Suspension of employee - The court emphasized that suspension based on personal grievances rather than official misconduct is unwarranted and punitive. (Paras 8, 9)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a school lecturer, faced suspension and salary withdrawal following an FIR related to a personal transaction, with no allegations against him in the FIR. (Paras 1-3)
Findings of Court:
The court determined that the actions against the petitioner were malicious and unjustifiable, quashing the suspension and reinstating his salary. (Paras 10)
Issues: The main issues included the legitimacy of the suspension based on a personal FIR and the fairness of the disciplinary actions taken against the petitioner. (Paras 6, 9)
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that actions taken against the petitioner were not reasonable or justifiable, emphasizing the principle of presumption of innocence and the need for fair procedures in disciplinary matters. (Paras 7, 10)
Result: Writ petitions allowed, and the impugned orders were quashed.
ORDER :
1. The instant writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India have been preferred by the petitioner being aggrieved by the actions of the respondents for suspending the petitioner, restraining him to withdraw salary and also for issuing the charge sheet against him.
2. Brief facts of the case are that he was working as a school Lecturer at Government Senior Secondary School, Rol. The petitioner purchased a plot from Himmat Ram vide registered sale deed 21.05.2005, which was alloted to Himmat Ram on 08.07.2000 and granted the permission for construction of house. One Purna Ram challenged the order of Municipal Board by way of revision petition which was allowed vide order dated 26.02.2008 and ordered for passing a fresh order. Petitioner being unaware of the order passed on 26.02.2008, sold the said property to one Hari Ram vide registered sale deed dated 26.02.2008.
3. Thereafter, one Mahaveer Singh lodged an FIR against Hari Ram, Pokar Ram, Haji Gujar bearing FIR No. 374/2016 before the SHO, P.S. Kotwali, Nagaur. In the FIR, no allegations were made against the petitioner. However, subsequently the investigating officer called the petitioner for submitting the documents and when he went to the office of SOG Ajmer on 26.07.2022, he was arrested thereafter and released on bail on 05.08.2022. After releasing on bail, he submitted an application before the Principal of Government Senior Secondary School, Rol on 26.08.2022 for joining back on his duty. Further, the District Education Officer, Secondary Education Headquarter, Nagaur passed an order dated 08.08.2022 whereby he was permitted to join back his duty but his salary was stopped. The patta issued in favour of Himmat Ram was found genuine and committee has granted permission to Hari Ram to construct a house.
4. The petitioner being aggrieved of the FIR lodged against him preferred a Criminal Misc. petition No. 7543/2022, in which the Court vide order dated 16.11.2022 has restrained the investigating officer from filing the charge sheet. Further, being aggrieved of the order dated 08.08.2022 preferred a civil writ petition No. 9529/2023, whereby this Court has passed an interim order on 18.09.2023 and the operative part of the order dated 08.08.2022 has been stayed. Then, the petitioner submitted an interim order dated 18.09.2023 of this Court to the respondent authorities and the Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner suspended the petitioner vide order dated 29.09.2023. The petitioner challenged the same in SBCWP No. 15959/2023 on the ground that he cannot be suspended only on the basis of arrest after delay of 1 year. This Court vide order dated 16.10.2023 stayed the effect and operation of order dated 29.09.2023. The respondent No.2 issued the charge sheet to the petitioner on 01.03.2024 with two charges and being aggrieved by that the present writ petition has been filed.
5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material placed on record.
6. After perusing the record and pondering upon the submissions and materials made available to the Court, prima facie, it is revealed that the petitioner was arrested for the offence under Sections 193, 420, 467, 468, 471, 477-A, 409 and 120-B of IPC which was of a private nature related to a personal transaction. Then, he was released on bail and also informed the respondents regarding the state of affair. The District Education Officer, Secondary Education Headquarter, Nagaur passed an order dated 08.08.2022 whereby he was permitted to join his duty but his salary was stopped. Interestingly, till then no other proceedings were initiated against him and miffed by the legitimate action taken by the petitioner by approaching the High Court, the petitioner was suspended. The suspension was challenged by the petitioner and it has been stayed. Afterwards, the charge-sheet was served to the petitioner.
7. This Court is of the considerate view that the mal
