Ram Nivash Prasad Singh vs The State of Jharkhand and Others

Prashant Kumar, J.—This writ application has been filed for quashing Notification No. 2806 dated 9.4.2008 (Annexure-8), whereby petitioner has been suspended on the allegation that he committed various irregularities in the appointment of Aaganbari Sevika and Sahayika. Sri Sameer Saurabh, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is nothing in the impugned order to show that the petitioner was suspended either in contemplation of departmental proceeding or during the pendency of the departmental proceeding, nor there is anything to show that any criminal case is pending against the petitioner. Thus, it appears that the petitioner has been suspended by way of punishment. Accordingly, it is submitted that impugned order cannot be sustained because petitioner has not been given any opportunity of hearing.

On the other hand, learned J.C. to G.P.-III submits that from perusal of Annexure-A/3, it is clear that the petitioner was suspended in contemplation of departmental proceeding.

Having heard the submission, I have gone through the record of the case. From perusal of Annexure-A/3, it appears that the State Government took decision to suspend the petitioner in contemplation of a departmental proceeding on the allegation that petitioner has committed various irregularities in the appointment of Aaganbari Sevika and Sahayika. In the said circumstance, I find no merit in the aforesaid submission of learned counsel for the petitioner. Accordingly, this writ application is dismissed being devoid of any merit.