CW 6477/06 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6477/06 Munesh Kumar Sharma Versus State & Ors. DATE OF ORDER : 10/11/2008 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI Mr. N.K. Singhal, for petitioner Mr. J.K. Agrawal, Addl. Govt. Counsel, for State *** Instant petition has been filed by petitioner assailing order of suspension dt.2nd June, 2005 [Ann.1] passed by the authority in exercise of power under R.13 of Rules, 1958 on account of an FIR under Prevention of Corruption Act dt.1st June, 2005 being registered against him. Petitioner was working as Personal Assistant to Superintending Engineer [Mines]. For the alleged incident of 1st June, 2005, an FIR No.122/05 was registered against him on 9th June, 2005 u/s.7(13)(1)(d)(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. It has been informed to this court by counsel for respondent-State on instructions of Officer Incharge that during pendency of petition CW 6477/06 [2] competent authority granted sanction and as a consequence whereof, the Investigating Officer filed challan against present petitioner in reference to FIR [supra]. Counsel for petitioner submits that he is under suspension since 2005 and FIR, as alleged, being made a basis for placing him under suspension will take its own time and certainly, cause prejudice to him and more than 3 yrs. have rolled by now and after filing challan, no satisfactory progress took place. Petitioner was placed under suspension because of an FIR under Prevention of Corruption Act being registered against him and challan has been filed against him. Taking note thereof, this court is not inclined to interfere in the order of suspension at this stage. However, this fact cannot be ruled out that more than 3 yrs. have rolled by now and criminal case registered against him will take its own time. This Court, therefore, considers it proper to direct the petitioner to make representation CW 6477/06 [3] under R.13(5) of Rules, 1958 for review of decision taken by the authority placing him under suspension. If such representation is made, it is expected from the authority to consider and decide the same within a period of two months by a speaking order. Copy of their decision be communicated to the petitioner also. If still petitioner feels aggrieved by their decision, he will be free to avail remedy available under law. With the above observations, writ petition stands disposed of. [AJAY RASTOGI], J. FRBOHRA6477CW06 10-11.doc