Kanhaiya Lal v. Collector, Tonk — 1966 DIGILAW 260 (RAJ)

This appeal has been filed against the order of the Collector, Tonk, dated the 22nd March, 1966, whereby the learned Collector ordered that Patwari should be deemed to have been suspended with effect from 22.1.1965. This order was passed by the Collector on remand of the case from the Board of Revenue vide order of the Regional Member dated 19.2.1966 accepting the appeal of the Patwari against the order of dismissal passed by the Collector dated 22.1.1965 and directing the Collector to decide the case in the light of the observations made therein according to the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification Control and Appeal) Rules, 1958. In passing his impugned order, the Collector has stated that on receipt of the case after remand the departmental enquiry is separately under progress but as the allegations against the Patwari are serious and in appeal only procedural irregularities were discovered, the patwari should be deemed to have been suspended from the date of his earlier dismissal viz 22.1.1965. The contention of the Patwari is that the order of the Collector suspending him with retrospective effect is per se bad in view of the fact that the learned Member who accepted the appeal had set aside the order of the Collector dated 22.1.1965. This would mean that status quo ante as it existed on 22.1.1965 stood restored. This contention has considerable weight. It is not clear from record whether during the course of the first enquiry which culminated in his dismissal on 22.1.1965, the Patwari had been suspended. If he had rot been suspended then, the natural effect of the order of the learned Member dated 19.2.1966 would be to restore the status quo ante as it stood on 22.1.1965. The impugned order of the Collector can be maintained only if the Patwari stood suspended before the date of the order of his dismissal dated 22.1.1965. I would, therefore, interfere with the order of the Collector dated 22.3.1966 to this extent only and would direct the learned Collector to examine from the record if the patwari stood suspended before 22.1.1965 and to restore status quo ante as it existed on that date. I would, therefore, interfere with the order of the Collector dated 22.3.1966 to this extent only and would direct the learned Collector to examine from the record if the patwari stood suspended before 22.1.1965 and to restore status quo ante as it existed on that date. Before parting with the case I would also like to draw the attention of the learned Collector to Government instructions contained in Apptts (A-III) Deptts order No. F. l(3)Apptts(AV61 Group III, dated the 7.2.1962, on the subject of expeditious disposal of departmental enquiry cases in respect of Govt. employees under suspension. Referring to the Govt. order No. D. 2900/F. 23(18)Apptts (A)/ 58 dated the 25.3.1958 and circular No. D.16633/59/F-19(27) Apptts (A)/60, dated the 17th March, 1960, it was reiterated therein that the disciplinary authorities are required to finalise within six months departmental enquiry cases in respect of Govt. servants under suspension, as delay in these cases causes avoidable drain on the State Exchequer and hardship to Government employees. It was, further, laid down therein that in cases where a delay exceeding one year is expected in finalising such a departmental enquiry, the prior approval of the administrative department must be obtained by the Heads of Departments. I have no doubt, therefore, that the learned Collector will now proceed to expedite the disposal of this enquiry in the light of the Govt. instructions.