IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.
Civil Writ Petition No. 5673 of 2009
DATE OF DECISION : OCTOBER 26, 2009
INDERJIT SINGH BUTTER
....... PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.
.... RESPONDENT(S)
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA
PRESENT: Mr. JP SHarma, Advocate, for the petitioner(s).
Mr. BS Chahal, DAG, Punjab.
AJAI LAMBA, J. (Oral)
This petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of
India has been filed praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari
quashing order of suspension dated 4.2.2008 (Annexure P-3). Further
prayer made is for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing
the respondents to reinstate the petitioner.
Essentially, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that
despite lapse of 22 months after registration of the FIR against the
Civil Writ Petition No. 5673 of 2009 2
petitioner under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988,
the Vigilance Department has failed to file the report under Section 173 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure against the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner further states that the
petitioner has been under suspension for considerable period. The
respondents are not taking any decision in regard to reinstatement or
otherwise of the petitioner. The respondents cannot keep the position
fluid in regard to the services of the petitioner, pending criminal
proceedings, particularly in view of the fact that no departmental
proceedings have been initiated.
At this stage, it would be wholly inappropriate to quash the
order of suspension. The petitioner, however, is entitled to a decision in
regard to the claim made in the petition and in representation dated
7.8.2008 (Annexure P-8).
This petition is, accordingly, disposed of with directions to
respondents No.2 and 3 to take a decision in regard to suspension of the
petitioner in the context of the rules and circular(s) issued by the State of
Punjab and pass appropriate orders within 3 months of receipt of certified
copy of this order.
October 26, 2009 ( AJAI LAMBA ) Kang JUDGE 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?