Mool Raj Raina vs RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT on 31 December 2024

ORDER

(Delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Rajinder S Dogra, Member-J)

1. The present Original Application has been filed by the applicant under Section-19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following reliefs:-

i. Quashing of order No. 103/DCJ of 2023 dated 16.05.2023.

ii. Commanding and directing the respondents to reinstate the applicant on the post as held by the applicant prior to the issuance of order impugned that is Panchayat Secretary.

iii. Commanding and directing the respondents to release the salary of the applicant."

2. The facts leading to filing of said O.A are summarized as under:  That the applicant was working as Panchayat Secretary in different blocks and the applicant remain posted in Block Mathwar as well as other blocks and thereafter, the applicant was transferred from Block Mathwar to Block Bhalwal vide order dated 02.07.2021

:: 3 ::

 That the applicant after transferred from Block Mathwar to Block Bhalwal vide order dated 02.07.2021 and the applicant was given the charge to the new incumbent Farooq Ali Panchayat Secretary along with the record and in this regard has also taken the receipt of handing over of the record as well as charge.  That Earlier also on the instance of DDC member who is the aid of local DDC member have filed the complaint against the applicant in Anti-Corruption Bureau Jammu and the Anti-corruption Bureau Jammu after conducting thorough verification has concluded that no loss has been caused to State exchequer as the works were executed after following the codal formalities and the allegation of accumulation of huge assets is not substantiated and in this regard the Anti- Corruption Bureau have forwarded the communication dated 09.12.2021 to the Commissioner/Secretary to Govt. General Administration Deptt. J&K, Jammu.  That Another complaint was also filed on the instance of Local DDC member against the applicant and on the complaint the enquiry committee was constituted whereby Block Development Officer Bhalwal, Block Development Officer Marh and Block Development Officer Satwari were

:: 4 ::

made the committee members and after through enquiry nothing was found against the applicant.  That when the local DDC member failed in his nefarious design he use his influence and in this regard the respondent no. 2 has written the letter to the SHO Amb Gharota in which the name of the applicant and present Panchayat Secretary Farooq Ali was mentioned and due to the result the FIR bearing no. 0036/2023 registered at Police Station Amb Gharota, Jammu dated 13.05.2023 under section 409, 120-B against the applicant as well as one Farooq Ali who is presently posted as Panchayat Secretary in place of applicant who was not arrested by the police till date.  That the police of Police Station Janipur, Jammu have made the recovery and also arrest the applicant on 14.05.2023 at about 3:00 A.M and whereas the fact is that the FIR was registered in Police Station Amb Gharota, Jammu and without any order or without any communication from Police Station Amb Gharota, Jammu which is against the mandate of law and the custody of applicant on this count is illegal.  That from the perusal of the contents of the letter forwarded by the respondent no. 2 to respondent no. 1 the offence under section 409 and 120-B was not made out against the

:: 5 ::

petitioner, hence the FIR impugned is nothing but is an attempt to harass and humiliate the applicant because the applicant was threatened by the Local DDC member that the Block Development Officer will never posted in Block Mathwar and he will remain in Block Mathwar and he will teach the lesson to the applicant by implicating him in false and frivolous case.

3. Mr. Ajaz Chowdhary, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that vide order dated 16.05.2023, in terms of Rule 31 of Jammu & Kashmir Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal), Rules, 1956, the applicant was placed under suspension as he remained in police custody for more than 48 hours. During the period of his suspension, he was attached with the Office of Additional Deputy Commissioner (Law & Order), Jammu.

4. Learned counsel further submitted that a period of more than one and half year has elapsed but uptil now neither any charge memo has been issued nor any further steps have been taken by the respondents to initiate the disciplinary proceedings against the applicant herein. Even, the order of suspension has not been reviewed.

5. Learned counsel still further submitted that in the case of Ajay Kumar Choudhary V/s Union of India & Anr (2015) 7 SCC

:: 6 ::

291, it has been held that the currency of the suspension order should not extend beyond three months, if within this period, charge sheet is not served upon the delinquent employee and even if a charge sheet is served, a reasoned order must be passed for extension of suspension. He further submitted that suspension, if it continues for an indeterminable period, becomes punitive in nature.

6. Learned counsel for applicant further stated that the applicant was arrested and thereafter the applicant was released on bail and the applicant was also placed under suspensions by the respondent no. 4 on dated 16.05.2023 and the respondent no. 04 is not competent to suspend the applicant and it is the respondent no. 1 who is competent to take decision with regard to the suspension of the applicant but the respondent no. 04 without any authority under law has issued the suspension order which is clearly violation of the civil service rule. Hence the impugned order is required to be set aside and further directions are required to be issued to the respondent no. 2 to 4 to reinstate the applicant and pay the salary to the pending outcome of criminal case.

7. Mr. Dewakar sharma , learned Additional Advocate General opposed the contentions made by learned counsel for the applicant and submitted that a complaint was filed against the

:: 7 ::

applicant in the year 2021 before Hon'ble LG UT of J&K and the copy of the same was forwarded to the Anti-Corruption Bureau Jammu and accordingly a preliminary enquiry was conducted by the department which however was not found satisfactory as such it was recommended to conduct the social audit of the works alleged to have been executed in Block Mathwar/ Bhalwal. Further the committee constituted for Social Audit found that certain record in respect of the works alleged to be executed was not available in the office. As such, FIR bearing No. 36/2023 was registered at P/S Gharota U/s 409/120-B of IPC on 13-05-2023 regarding stealing of record of the block pertaining to various schemes w.e.f 2015 to 2023 and investigation of the case was carried out and during investigation, so many things were police party from his residential premises of applicant and thus was arrested on 14- 05-2023 and was released on bail by the order of Hon'ble 3rd Additional Sessions Court Jammu on 05-06-2023.

8. Learned counsel for respondents further submitted that the further investigation of the case registered against the applicant was transferred to Crime Branch Jammu however in the meanwhile the applicant approached the Hon'ble High Court by filing CRM (M) bearing No. 605/2023 titled Mool Raj Raina vs UT of J&K and Ors. wherein Hon'ble Court vide order dated 21-07-2023 directed that the challan shall not be presented

:: 8 ::

before the competent Court of law without prior permission of this Court however the investigation in the FIR may go on and after the suspension of the applicant vide Govt. Order No. 276- JK(RD&PR) of 2023 dated 22-05-2023, Joint Director (Adm) Directorate of Rural Development was appointed as Inquiry Officer to conduct in depth inquiry with regard to alleged concealing and deliberately hiding the relevant record of the works, who vide communication no. DRDJ-Comp/275/2022- 02/45076-77 dated 21-02-2024 submitted the enquiry report to the Administrative Department stating therein that due to the pendency of criminal case which is under investigation by Crime Branch and also investigation by Anti-Corruption Bureau in the complaint against the applicant and it is not tenable to give final concluding remarks in the matter.

9. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.

10. Since, a period of more than one and half years has already elapsed from the date of issuance of suspension order of the applicant, this Tribunal is of the view the impugned suspension order needs to be revoked keeping in view the law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ajay Kumar Choudhary (supra).

:: 9 ::

11. In view of the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Prem Nath Bali Vs. Registrar, High Court of Delhi (2015) 16 SCC 415, the respondents were required to conclude the disciplinary proceedings within a period of six months. However, the respondents have failed to abide by the said principles.

12. Accordingly, the impugned suspension order dated 16.05.2023 is hereby quashed and set-aside. The respondents are directed to reinstate the applicant forthwith. The applicant will be entitled to all the consequential dues as per rules. This exercise shall be completed within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

13. However, the respondents are at liberty to take further disciplinary action as they deem fit strictly in accordance with the law governing the field.

14. No cost.

(RAM MOHAN JOHRI) (RAJINDER SINGH DOGRA) MEMBER (A) MEMBER (J)

AK/PS/PK/RP/VS