Back
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
O.P. Garg and Onkareshwar Bhatt, JJ.
Dr.Dalbir Singh
Versus
State of U.P.
C.M.W.P. 30578 of 1990
Decided On : 22 May 2001
C. M. W. P. 30578 Of 1990
Suspension - Service Rules - Financial Hand Book, Volume II. Parts II to IV - The court discussed the statutory recognition of the right to suspend an employee, the payment of subsistence allowance, and the implications of non-payment of subsistence allowance. The court emphasized the employer's duty to pay subsistence allowance and highlighted the adverse effects of suspension on the employee and their family. The judgment also referenced guidelines for placing a delinquent employee under suspension and the necessity of objective consideration before suspension.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a doctor, was suspended in 1990 and had not been paid any subsistence allowance or undergone any inquiry for over a decade. The court found non-payment of subsistence allowance to vitiate the suspension order and directed the petitioner's reinstatement and payment of subsistence allowance.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the non-payment of subsistence allowance to invalidate the suspension order and directed the petitioner's reinstatement and payment of subsistence allowance. The court also clarified that the appointing authority retained the power to suspend the petitioner again if necessary and directed the conclusion of the departmental inquiry within six months.
Issues: Non-payment of subsistence allowance, validity of suspension order, necessity of objective consideration before suspension, and conclusion of departmental inquiry.
Ratio Decidendi: The non-payment of subsistence allowance vitiates the suspension order. The appointing authority retains the power to suspend the petitioner again if necessary. The departmental inquiry must be concluded within six months.
Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, quashing the suspension order and directing the petitioner's reinstatement and payment of subsistence allowance. The respondents were directed to conclude the departmental inquiry within six months.
( 1 ) HEARD Dr. Balbir Singh-petitioner who appeared, in person.
( 2 ) IT is sad and bad that despite sufficient opportunities, no counter-affidavit has been filed in this case. The petitioner has filed a supplementary affidavit. which remains uncontroverted as no supplementary counter-affidavit has been filed. Even no one is present to oppose this petition on behalf of the respondents, including. State of U. P.
( 3 ) THE petitioner, a doctor belonging to Provincial Health Service of the State, was posted at agra in 1985. According to the petitioner, Dr. M. K. Ansari, who was the then Chief Medical officer. Agra wanted to post his own man in place of the petitioner and therefore, at his behest, the petitioner was transferred from Agra to Mainpuri. On the representation of the petitioner, his transfer order from Agra to Mainpuri was cancelled. However, Dr. M. K. Ansari. Chief Medical officer relieved the petitioner from Pinahat. Agra and also withdrew the financial powers of the petitioner. The petitioner, on account of order of cancellation of his transfer order, passed by higher authority, did not hand over the charge and continued to function as such at Agra. Ultimately, the orders passed by Director General Medical Health. Lucknow, dated 3. 7. 1987 and 25. 7. 1987 In favour of the petitioner were complied with by Dr. K. M. Ansari on 16. 11. 1987 but he did not pass consequential order regarding handing over of charge and payment of back wages. Against this attitude of Dr. Ansari, wife of the petitioner made representations to the higher authorities. On her representation. Joint Director (Personnel) passed an order on 21. 1. 1988 directing Chief Medical Officer, Agra to comply with the order dated 25. 7. 1987. He also directed the Chief Medical Officer to inform as to why the aforesaid orders were not complied with for such a long period. It is in these circumstances that Dr. Ansari. Chief Medical officer had to issue order allowing the petitioner to take charge at Pinahat. Agra and to draw his arrears of salary. It is alleged that at the behest of Dr. Ansari, Chief Medical Officer, Agra, false and concocted complaints were filed against the petitioner and an inquiry into the matter was entrusted to one Dr. B. D. Mehrotra, Deputy Chief Medical Officer. Agra. On inquiry, the complaints were found to be baseless and report to this effect was submitted by Dr. Mehrotra. In the meantime. Dr. Ansari was promoted to the post of Additional Director and he was posted at agra. In his place, one Sri Daulat Ram took over as Chief Medical Officer, and according to the petitioner. Dr. Daulat Ram was prejudiced and biased against the petitioner for. certain personal reasons. On account of connivance of Dr. Daulat Ram and Dr. Ansari, false case was made out against the petitioner and he was placed under suspension on 26. 4. 1990 on the charges of dereliction of duty embezzlement of Government fund financial irregularities : Indiscipline false vesectomy, and misuse of Government vehicle. At the relevant time, the petitioner was posted at almora. The petitioner denied all the allegations levelled against him. According to the petitioner. Secretary, Medical Health, Government of U. P. being not his appointing authority is not competent authority to pass the Impugned suspension order. Besides this, the petitioner has challenged the impugned order of suspension on variety of grounds. In the supplementary affidavit, the petitioner has stated that till date neither any inquiry has been conducted nor subsistence allowance is being paid to him.
( 4 ) THERE can be no doubt about the fact that an employer has an innate and unqualified right to place an employee under suspension in accordance with the rules, in contemplation of departmental inquiry. This right has received statutory recognition in Service Rules as well as various Government orders. During the period of suspension, the relationship of master and servant
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
