SBCWP5879/2010 // 1 // IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5879/2010 Narendra Singh Shekhawat Vs. The State of Rajasthan and Others Date of Order ::: 29.04.2010 Present Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mohammad Rafiq Shri S.L. Kumawat, Counsel for petitioner #### By the Court:- Grievance of petitioner is that respondents have mechanically placed him under suspension by order dated 04.07.2006 on account of criminal case registered against him at the instance of his estranged wife. The criminal case registered against him was under Sections 498-A and 406 of the Indian Penal Code. Petitioner was placed under suspension in a matter trial of which is under process. In criminal trial so far as prosecution evidence has been recorded and completion of the trial is likely to take time. This Court earlier by its order dated 13.11.2009, while disposing of petitioner's earlier Writ Petition No.14109/2009 directed the respondents to consider his representation without being influenced by Circular dated 10.08.2001 and decide the same by passing a speaking order. It was observed that if petitioner was aggrieved by such order passed, he would be free to avail the remedy SBCWP5879/2010 // 2 // under law. Contention of learned counsel for petitioner is that respondents have in an identical case reinstated one Shri Pawan Kumar Jain, Junior Engineer, who too was working in the Public Works Department of the Government of Rajasthan at Surajgarh and who was also placed under suspension on account of his arrest in connection with a criminal case filed against him for the offence under Sections 498-A and 406 IPC. But when he submitted a representation, the respondents by taking note of various judgments of this Court, decided to revoke his suspension. This fact came to petitioner's knowledge subsequently when he obtained certain documents under the Right to Information Act. Although in the present case already once this Court directed the respondents to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner but now that the petitioner has produced a fresh material which apparently show that the respondents have adopted an absolutely discriminatory attitude towards the petitioner while in exactly identical case, they have revoked suspension of Shri Pawan Kumar Jain, Junior Engineer, who too was placed under suspension on the basis of criminal case for similar offence, the petitioner is required to make a fresh representation to the respondents producing therewith copy of note-sheet which he has obtained under the Right to Information Act. The Chief SBCWP5879/2010 // 3 // Engineer, Public Works Department, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur, who revoked the suspension of Shri Pawan Kumar Jain considering as many as four judgments of this Court, shall deal with contention of the petitioner in the same context and pass appropriate order on such representation; if he decides not to revoke the petitioner's suspension, he is required to give reasons on the dissimilar treatment accorded to the petitioner. Such representation shall be disposed of within a period of six weeks from the date of its making. Writ petition accordingly stands disposed of. (Mohammad Rafiq) J. //Jaiman//