Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/14873/2010 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 14873 of 2010
=========================================================
KANUBHAI
N CHAUHAN - Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT THROUGH DEPUTY SECRETARY & 2 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MS
AMITA S SHAH for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
MR MAULIK NANAVATI AGP for Respondent(s) :
1,
NOTICE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 2,
MR CB UPADHYAYA for
Respondent(s) :
3,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE H.K.RATHOD
Date
: 07/07/2011
ORAL
ORDER
Heard
learned advocate Ms. AS Shah on behalf of petitioner, learned
advocate Mr. Upadhyay appearing for respondent no. 2 and 3, learned
AGP Mr. Maulik Nanavati appearing for respondent no. 1.
In
present petition, petitioner has challenged order dated 18/8/2010
page 37 Annexure I where decision has been taken by respondent no. 2
that let petitioner may remain continue under suspension. It is not
a case for reinstatement.
Learned
advocate Ms. Shah submitted that while passing aforesaid order on
18/8/2010, respondent no. 2 has not considered Government Resolution
dated 20/7/2007. She submitted that initially suspension period is
to be remained continue upto ninety days. Then it can be extended
for further period of ninety days but there is no further extension
order passed by respondent. Therefore, according to Government
Resolution dated 20/7/2007, such suspension order is considered to
be invalid.
She
also relied upon suspension order which has been passed by
respondent page 19 dated 9/6/2008. She also made clear that after
six months, quantum of suspension allowance has been increased from
50% to 75%, but there was no extension of suspension order or period
of suspension is not extended. Therefore, present petition is filed.
The
affidavit in reply is not filed by respondent no. 2 who is authority
has power to suspend present petitioner. In light of this back
ground, petitioner is facing both i.e. Criminal Prosecution as well
as Departmental inquiry. In such circumstances, he is under
suspension though more than three years have passed. Therefore, it
is better that let respondent no. 2 may re-examine matter in light
of Government Resolution dated 20/7/2007. Then to pass appropriate
reasoned order in accordance with law, which will meet end of
justice between parties.
In
light of above facts and circumstances, it is directed to respondent
no. 2 to reconsider decision dated 18/8/2010 while considering
Government Resolution dated 20/7/2007. Then to pass appropriate
reasoned order in accordance with Government resolution as well as
law within a period of six weeks from date of receiving copy of
present order and communicate decision to petitioner immediately.
In
view of above observation and directions, present petition is
disposed of by this Court without expressing any opinion on merits.
(H.K.RATHOD,
J)
asma
Top