T— ^' IN IHE H23H CCUBT O? JUBICATUSE AT BXLBSPUR (C.S.) WRIT ISIITION N0. 6 & 7 0? 2004 M'EW^ Maxi Kijur S/e Sfnase Hajur, aged about 36 years, eccupatlan Sub Divisional efficer* Vfater -Reseurcss Sub Divisien Bhanupratsp B-ir, .District Kanker (CS) . ./•: ..y' ,N^/ ^y ^.••"' EETITICNER A N B ^t^/' tt-": ...-.-." '' '> tit- ^^•'"•^-.^ 'l ,,;,' "^~~~\ ^. 1( '*r&aA w^t;\,*^i ,; j'^5_3^'^'f/L,|j it, -^ '<i. '!yS'y )t}-^ ^" ^^ il <4>'".// ^a.'ST.??^' /y 3. The State ef chhattisgarh, threugh the sscr-etary Water Resources, BBpartms-it, Mantralay, B.K.s.Biilding, Kaipur, Td'isll an<3 District Raipur (CG). Engineep- in-Chief» tfeter Resources Department, Sihawa Shawan, Baipur, Tehsil and Dlstrict Raipur (ce). Si.iperln-teiding Bagineer, Bidrawati Paris®jnaMandal* Raipar, TehsU and Bd.str.i.ct Raipur (CG). 4. ^{Bcecutive Eiaglneer, / ^^tetter Besources DlvlgiGn, K&nker (03). sy;^^^-?^^ BESR3NDENTS V'WRIT iETraiCN UNBER ARTICLES 22fe/227 O? 1HE COHSTiaTOIGN OF INDIB =F WW W^EW^Ntf:_&°^^^: asfetW QR^*§® J m <ttt^-! s«teg^^lff! 06.04.2004 Smt. RenuKochar, counsel for thetietitioner. Shri SanjayS. Agrawal, PanelLawj^erforthe State Heard. By this writ petitiQn filed under Ai|icles 'petidoner is challenging the order dated] ipetitioner was piaced uuder suspension Servicss (Classification, Control and Appea|') L<amed counsel for the petitionerj Ifbr the offence punishable Ws 354, 323 Ithe leamed Magistrate on the basis of; Annexure P-3. However, even afier acqu]|tal {the charge sheet has been ffled against Ihe f^ Rule 9(l)(b) ofiM.P.C»a Senf. oftPC, |Rulesl966wtuchrelates&sugpensioriis /. ot any authority fo whieh it is or any other authoaty <P«vemor by general or special under suspension - "9.(1) The appointing authoiily subordinate or the disciplinary ai(}iority smpowered m that behalf by the order, may place a Govermnent serfant (a) xxx xxx xxx, . (b) where.a case against him in re^iect ofany crimmal offenee is under inventilation, iaquiry or ti|al: [Provided that a Govenanent Serfant under suspension when a chaUan cormption or other moral turpitude Provided fiirther that where the ord authority lower than the appointin^ forfhwitii report to the appointmg which the order was made." <ftpfessttN*-NM^' i^3^^ 226/227 of the Constitution.of India 110.2.2004 (Aanexure P-1) whereby fhe |mder Rule 9(l)(b) of the C. G. Chil iRulesl966.. • : ^ubmiS that the petitioner was prosecuted but the offencb was compounded and |ompromise acquitted fhe petitiorier vide he was suspended on fhe ground that ititioner. ses (Classification, Cpntrol and Appeal) i^evanthereandquotedbeiow: ; shaU invariably be placed a criminal offence involving s ffled against bim:] ftr sr of suspension is made by an i authority,; such authority shaB Lauthority fke circumstances in i-iilll-U-i-,..,..,-— ^^S^i;^^';^;^^^' ^'SgWsSSWiVifK^O'K^.eWf- SIW ^ ^^B^^B' ^f^!fll^i' •^ ^' -(:• Raol- If is pemted put that fliough fti been compounded and the applieant h 9(l)(b) (he suspension san only be investigation, inquiry or trial. Ih fhe sustainable and Bable to be set aside and Tlris petition stands disf <ftfctt| th!?lPiEM^^t^^<^^^] w l-cnminal case was filed but the offence has |s been aequitted. Thus, iaview oftheRule issued.when any crinunal offence is unaer |resent case, wfaen'the;gi»spension order was issued the peritidner WM already acql|itted. The suspension brder/as sach,^ M |accordingty it is setaside. Sd/- Fakhruddin Judge. J-£L