AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
A.N. Venugopala Gowda, J.—An order of suspension, as at Annexure-A, passed by the respondent against the petitioner has been assailed in this writ petition.
Sri Gangadharaiah, learned advocate for the petitioner contended that the impugned order is arbitrary and illegal, since, no opportunity to rebut the allegations was provided and that there is violation of principles of natural justice. He submitted that the petitioner has been kept under suspension with malafide intention and hence interference is warranted.
Perused the writ record.
In contemplation of holding a domestic enquiry into the allegations appearing against the petitioner, he has been kept under suspension by issuing the order dated 18.01.2014, as at Annexure-A. Suspension allowance has been ordered to be paid to the petitioner.
Perusal of Annexure-A shows that, on account of alleged misconduct based on a complaint dated 01.01.2014 of a consumer, a show-cause notice having been issued on 07.01.2014 and the Vigilance Team having submitted reports, in contemplation of holding disciplinary enquiry, the order of suspension, as at Annexure-A has been passed.
Suspension from the service is an action, whereby, an employee is kept out of duty temporarily pending final action being taken against him for the alleged acts of misdemeanor etc., that too, when the allegation of serious in nature is received and it decided to hold departmental enquiry into such allegations. Suspension from the service pending departmental proceedings against the employee is not a punishment. In the circumstances, in view of the statement made in Annexure-A, it cannot be said that the 1st respondent having acted arbitrarily or illegally, in placing the petitioner under suspension, pending holding of a departmental enquiry.
In the circumstances, I do not find justification, at this stage, to interfere with the impugned order of suspension. Since, it is open to the petitioner to submit a representation seeking revocation of suspension order as at Annexure-A and as the respondent has an obligation to conduct a periodical review in the matter, reserving liberty to the petitioner to submit a representation to the respondent seeking revocation of the order of suspension, petition is disposed of.
No costs.