Suspension of an elected public representative must adhere to procedural fairness while upholding the integrity of judicial inquiries, as misconduct undermines public trust.

Order :

ANOOP KUMAR DHAND, J.

For convenience of exposition, this judgment is divided in the following parts:-

INDEX

(1) Submissions by counsel for petitioner:-…….…………….….......2

(2) Judgments referred by counsel for petitioner:-…………….…..5

(3) Submissions by counsel for respondents:-.……..…….…......…5

(4) Judgments referred by counsel for respondents:-……………..8

(5) Rejoinder by counsel for petitioner:-……………………………....8

(6) Discussions & Analysis:-.…………….………………………………….9

(7) Conclusion & Direction:-……………………………………………….28

1. By way of filing this writ petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned order dated 23.09.2024 passed by the respondents by which the petitioner has been placed under suspension from the post of Mayor of Jaipur Municipal Corporation, Heritage.

Submissions by counsel for petitioner:-

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that an F.I.R. was registered against the petitioner’s husband with the Anti- Corruption Bureau, alleging that he was involved in taking bribe in consideration of signing a patta.

3. Counsel submits that certain news articles were published in the newspaper and based on the basis same, the petitioner was placed under suspension vide order dated 05.08.2023, which was assailed before this Court by way of filing S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.12675/2023. Counsel submits that while the suspension order was stayed by this Court, the respondent-State subsequently revoked the said order vide order dated 01.09.2023, rendering the writ petition infructuous.

4. Counsel submits that again the petitioner was again placed under suspension by the respondents vide order dated 22.09.2023 and the said order was again assailed by the petitioner before this Court by way of filing S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.15551/2023. This Court vide order dated 01.12.2023 quashed and set-aside the suspension order and directed the respondents to appoint a new Enquiry Officer to conduct a fresh enquiry against the petitioner with regard to the allegations levelled against her. Counsel further submits that while deciding the aforesaid matter, this Court issued a specific direction to the respondents to do the needful exercise within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the order.

5. Counsel submits that after passing of the aforesaid order dated 01.12.2023, the petitioner re-joined as Mayor and she continued to hold the said office until 24.09.2024, i.e., for a period of more than 9 months and 27 days. Counsel submits that while deciding S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.15551/2023, this Court took note of the fact that the application submitted by the petitioner in the earlier matter was treated as reply by the concerned Enquiry Officer and this Court was of the considered view that the said application, submitted by the petitioner, ought not to have been treated as her reply. Counsel submits that considering these material aspects of the matter, this Court quashed the suspension order vide order dated 01.12.2023.

6. Counsel submits that without providing any information or supplying a copy of the order, appointing the Enquiry Officer against the petitioner, a notice under Section 39 (1) of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 2009 (for short, “the Act of 2009”) was issu