CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsDivision Bench(2012) 02 SHI CK 0031

Arvind Kumar vs State of Himachal Pradesh

High Court Of Himachal Pradesh · Decided on 29 February 2012

HON’BLE JUDGES
Kurian Joseph, J · Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J
CASE NUMBER
CWP No. 9637 of 2011-D

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 342 words

Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J.—Writ petition is filed mainly with following prayer: I) That the respondents may kindly be directed to consider the case of the petitioner for fixing his headquarter at Nahan at any one of the places which have been mentioned in preceding paragraphs of the petition.

On 11.11.2011, in CMP No. 11592 of 2011, this Court passed the following orders:

There will be a direction to the first respondent to file short affidavit as to the ground on which the petitioner has been placed under suspension.

The petitioner has a grievance with regard to fixation of headquarter at Shimla. The purpose of suspension of an incumbent from service is only to keep him away from service, so that during the pendency of inquiry, the incumbent may not have access to the records and there may not be any other adverse interference in the proper conduct of inquiry. From the order, it is not discernible as to how and whether any such interference on the part of the petitioner is apprehended. There being such a satisfaction, there is no justification for shifting the headquarter for any other place. The headquarter is fixed so as to ensure the availability of the delinquent officer for participation in the inquiry. That does not mean that an incumbent will be attached to a particular office. Headquarter is the place and not the office. In that view of the matter, it is made clear that the petitioner shall not be compelled to be present in the office of the Director Higher Education for the time being. However, he shall not leave Nahan without informing the third respondent.

Post on 21.12.2011.

2.

The above order is made absolute. In view of the above order, no grievance in that regard subsists. In case, the petitioner has still any other grievance with regard to the continued suspension, it will be open to the petitioner to pursue the same in accordance with law. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any.