9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (6) TMI 717X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... here are as many as three charges and only one charge relates to the death of four persons due to the poisonous liquor consumption. Other two charges relate to the other dereliction of duties by the Respondent No. 4. Learned Single Judge appears to have lost sight of the said charge sheet while passing the order under challenge and observing that no departmental enquiry was contemplated against the writ petitioner. If the Respondent No. 4 is entitled to continue at the same place where he was posted at the time of passing the suspension order and committing the alleged misconduct? - HELD THAT:- Permitting a delinquent employee to continue at the same place where the Departmental enquiry is held and misconduct is committed, may not be in the interest of the administration or in public interest, therefore, even if the employee concerned is not placed under suspension, then ordinarily it is in the public interest and interest of the administration and also in the interest of fair and transparent enquiry that the employee concerned is transferred from that place. Even otherwise it lies exclusively within the domain of the administration to decide as per the administrative exigency ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rit petitioner. Learned Single Judge by the order dated 26/5/2020 had stayed the operation of the order of suspension. The State government had filed the reply dated 30th May, 2020. The appellant in WA 593/2020 had filed the intervention application along with the application for vacating of stay. Learned Single Judge by order under challenge has allowed the writ petition and set aside the suspension order passed against the Respondent No. 4 holding it to be a stigmatic order and also observing that the order does not mention that any departmental enquiry is contemplated against him and also making certain observations on the merits of the charge in favour of the Respondent No. 4. [3] Learned counsel for appellant in WA No.590/2020 has submitted that the appellant has been transferred on the post which fell vacant due to the suspension of the Respondent No.4, therefore, the learned Single Judge is not justified in directing transfer of the appellant to some other place. He further submits that the appellant was not even impleaded in the writ petition, therefore, intervention application was required to be filed. He submits that the appellant is presently working on the post in q ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nterfered with the order of suspension passed by the authorities. The Division Bench has given no reason for upholding the learned Single Judge's order revoking the suspension order. In matters of this kind, it is advisable that the concerned employees are kept out of the mischief's range. If they are exonerated, they would be entitled to all their benefits from the date of the order of suspension. Whether the employees should or should not continue in their office during the period of inquiry is a matter to be assessed by the concerned authority ordinarily, the Court should not interfere with the orders of suspension unless they are passed mala fide and without there being even a prima facie evidence on record connecting the employees with the misconduct in question. In the present case, before the preliminary report was received, the Director was impressed by the 1st respondent-employee's representation. However after the report, it was noticed that the employee could not he innocent. Since this is the conclusion arrived at by the management on the basis of the material in their possession, no Conclusions to the contrary could be drawn by the Court at the interlocutor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the operation of law or affects the individual or society. Though judicial restraint, albeit self-recognised, is the order of the day, yet an administrative decision or action which is based on wholly irrelevant considerations or material; or excludes from consideration the relevant material; or it is so absurd that no reasonable person could have arrived at it on the given material, may be struck down. In other words, when a court is satisfied that there is an abuse or misuse of power, and its jurisdiction is invoked, it is incumbent on the court to intervene. It is nevertheless, trite that the scope of judicial review is limited to the deficiency in the decision-making process and not the decision. 24. Long period of suspension does not make the order of suspension invalid. However, in State of H.P. v. B.C. Thakur [1994 SCC (L S) 835 : (1994) 27 ATC 567], this Court held that where for any reason it is not possible to proceed with the domestic enquiry the delinquent may not be kept under suspension. 25. There cannot be any doubt that the 1965 Rules are a self-contained code and the order of suspension can be examined in the light of the statutory provisions to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it results in prolongation of sufferings for the delinquent employee, the court may issue directions. The court may, in case the authority fails to furnish proper explanation for delay in conclusion of the enquiry, direct to complete the enquiry within a stipulated period. However, mere delay in conclusion of enquiry or trial cannot be a ground for quashing the suspension order, if the charges are grave in nature. But, whether the employee should or should not continue in his office during the period of enquiry is a matter to be assessed by the disciplinary authority concerned and ordinarily the court should not interfere with the orders of suspension unless they are passed in mala fide and without there being even a prima facie evidence on record connecting the employee with the misconduct in question. [9] Having examined the present case in the light of the limited scope of judicial review, it is noticed that during the lockdown period due to Covid 19 effect, four persons had died by consuming poisonous liquor at Ratlam and the Respondent No. 4 being the in charge of the district has been prima-facie found to be careless in controlling the sale of illicit liquor in the dist ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed that the government can transfer the person concerned to any department in any of its office within or outside the State so as to sever any local or personal contact that he may have and which he may misuse for obstructing the investigation against him. In this regard it has been held that:- 21. We, therefore, direct that the currency of a suspension order should not extend beyond three months if within this period the memorandum of charges/charge-sheet is not served on the delinquent officer/employee; if the memorandum of charges/charge-sheet is served, a reasoned order must be passed for the extension of the suspension. As in the case in hand, the Government is free to transfer the person concerned to any department in any of its offices within or outside the State so as to sever any local or personal contact that he may have and which he may misuse for obstructing the investigation against him. The Government may also prohibit him from contacting any person, or handling records and documents till the stage of his having to prepare his defence. We think this will adequately safeguard the universally recognised principle of human dignity and the right to a speedy trial and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion of the learned Single Judge to post the Respondent No. 4at the same place where he was posted prior to suspension and transfer the appellant in WA 593/2020 to some other place cannot be sustained. [17] The third issue is if learned Single Judge is justified in making observation on merits of the charge which is levelled against the Respondent No. 4. [18] The findings given by learned Single Judge on merits of the charge in favour of the Respondent No. 4 were not warranted because the finding in respect of the charge will be recorded by the enquiry officer/competent authority on conclusion of departmental enquiry, therefore, at this stage the Respondent No. 4 cannot be given a clean chit especially when the entire material is not before the court. [19] Having regard to the aforesaid, we allow the writ appeals partially by affirming the direction of the learned Single Judge to the extent it relates to quashing the order of suspension but we are unable to sustain the direction of the learned Single Judge permitting the delinquent Respondent No. 4 to continue at the present place of posting and to transfer or give posting to the appellant in WA No.593/2020 to some other p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
