Shafiqullah Khan vs State of U.P.and others.

Shabihul Hasnain, J.

Heard Sri O.P. Srivastava, learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondents.

Aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Single Judge 12.11.08, by means of which, the writ petition filed by the appellant challenging his suspension order dated 22.1.04 has been dismissed.

The learned Single Judge has observed that the matter can very well be inquired into in the disciplinary proceedings, which have been initiated and the authenticity of the certificates and whether they were forged or not can only be gone into in the departmental proceedings and not in the proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Learned counsel for the appellant Sri O.P. Srivastava has made an effort to impress upon the Court, saying that the departmental proceedings are based on no material, as apart from the fact that the charge sheet filed in the criminal court has already been quashed, the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Behraich has also passed a declaratory decree in favour of the appellant declaring the said certificates to be valid.

We do agree with the observation made by the learned Single Judge that the question of truthfulness of the charge and its proof, will be the matter, which is to be considered by the enquiry officer. The department would be at liberty to produce such evidence, which it finds necessary for proving the charge and the appellant would also be at liberty to produce the evidence to disprove the charge and to show his innocence.

The High Court would not interfere in such matters.

Learned counsel for the appellant has rightly prayed that because the appellant is continuing under suspension for last more than five years, therefore, a direction be issued for completion of the pending enquiry within a definite period.

He, however, submits that since the enquiry has not been completed till date, the suspension order deserves to be quashed on this ground alone.

Learned counsel for the appellant further says that though the appellant has already submitted his reply to the charge sheet, but an opportunity be given to him for filing an additional reply within one week from today.

We, under the circumstances, while dismissing the special appeal direct that the enquiry shall be concluded by the enquiry officer within a maximum period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, taking into consideration the additional reply, which will be submitted by the appellant within one week from today. The enquiry officer shall submit his report on or before the expiry of the aforesaid period of two months to the disciplinary/appointing authority, who shall take necessary steps and pass final orders within next one month. In case the appellant seeks any adjournment, the period of such adjournment shall be excluded from the time schedule referred to above. The appellant shall cooperate in the enquiry.

In case the enquiry is not completed within the time provided, despite cooperation of the appellant in the enquiry, the order of suspension shall stand revoked on the expiry of the aforesaid period, but in that event too, the enquiry shall be completed expeditiously.

The special appeal is accordingly dismissed.