[2023:RJ-JD:37486]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

JODHPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11843/2023

Anil Kumar Jhingonia S/o Badri Narayan Jhingonia, Aged About

31 Years, C-18, Vidhan Sabha Colony, Murlipura Scheme, Jaipur

(Rajasthan).

----Petitioner

Versus

1.

State Of Rajasthan-State, Through The Secretary To The

Local Self Department, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

2.

The Director Cum Special Secretary, Directorate, Local

Self Department, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s)

:

Mr. Vikas Balia, Sr. Advocate with

Mr. Sachin Saraswat.

For Respondent(s)

:

Mr. Kunal Upadhyay for

Mr. Sunil Beniwal, AAG.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI

Order

02/11/2023

1.

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved

of the order dated 8/8/2023 (Annex.7), whereby, he has been

placed under suspension in exercise of powers under Rule 13 of

the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal)

Rules, 1958 (‘the Rules, 1958’).

2.

It is inter alia submitted that the suspension of the petitioner

is outcome of political interference, whereby, the respondents

anyhow wanted to remove the petitioner from the post of

Executive Officer, Municipal Board, Mt. Abu.

3.

Submissions have been made that the petitioner was posted

on 11/1/2022 on the post of Executive Officer, Municipal Board,

[2023:RJ-JD:37486]

(2 of 4)

[CW-11843/2023]

Abu Road; he was placed under suspension on 22/5/2022, which

was challenged by the petitioner by way of writ petition before this

Court, when the Court directed to produce the record pertaining to

placing of the petitioner under suspension, on 5/7/2022 the

suspension order dated 22/5/2022 was revoked and the petitioner

was posted at Municipal Board, Tijara. Thereafter, he was posted

at Municipal Board, Sirohi on 20/8/2022. On 2/3/2023, the

petitioner was kept Awaiting Posting Order and on 13/3/2023 he

was posted as Executive Officer, Municipal Board, Mt. Abu.

4.

Thereafter, on 24/7/2023 again the petitioner was kept APO

and on the next day, the order dated 24/7/2023 was cancelled,

which was followed by order dated 8/8/2023 placing him under

suspension.

5.

Further submissions have been made that sequence of

events clearly show that the arbitrariness of the respondents is

writ large and the petitioner has been placed under suspension for

no apparent reason.

6.

The respondents appeared on caveat and filed reply to the

writ petition denying the averments made in the petition.

7.

Submissions were made that the factual inquiry report

pertaining to the actions of the petitioner was submitted on

31/5/2023 (Annex.R/1) indicating several lapses on part of the

petitioner and, therefore, the order dated 8/8/2023 was passed in

contemplation of inquiry which is well within the powers conferred

under the provisions of Rule 13 (1) of the Rules, 1958.

8.

Further submissions have been made that now the charge

sheet dated 20/10/2023 also has been issued to the petitioner

and, therefore, it cannot be said that the suspension of the

[2023:RJ-JD:37486]

(3 of 4)

[CW-11843/2023]

petitioner based on contemplated inquiry was not justified. It was

prayed that the petition be dismissed.

9.

Learned counsel for the petitioner attempted to make

submissions based on the merits of the factual inquiry report as

well as the charge sheet issued to the petitioner to indicate that

the same do not make out a case for suspending the petitioner

and also emphasized that looking to the sequence of events, it is

apparent that exercise of powers under Rule 13 of the Rules, 1958

is not bonafide.

10.

Learned counsel for the respondents reiterated the

submissions as noticed hereinbefore.

11.

I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel

for the parties and have perused the material available on record.

12.

A bare look at the provisions of Rule 13 of the Rules, 1958

reveals that an employee can be placed under suspension duri