1 S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 3888/2009 Kashi Ram Rajpurohit Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Date of Order :: 24.04.2009 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOVIND MATHUR Mr Mukesh Rajpurohit, for the petitioner/s. Mr Mukul Singhvi, for the respondents. ... By an order dated 6.6.2003 the Collector, Bikaner while exercising power under Rule 13 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1958 placed the petitioner under suspension. By way of filing a petition for writ the petitioner assailed validity of the order aforesaid on the count that the Collector was having no authority to suspend an employee of the Public Works Department. This Court by the order dated 11.8.2004 admitted the petition for writ for hearing and also stayed effect and operation of the order dated 6.6.2003 placing the petitioner under suspension. In pursuant to the order dated 11.8.2004 the petitioner was reinstated on 13.8.2004. The writ petition aforesaid came to be disposed of on 11.7.2008 by quashing the order dated 6.6.2003 with a direction to the respondents to complete the inquiry said to be pending against the petitioner expeditiously as far as possible within a period of six months from the date of decision. As per the averments contained in petition for writ the inquiry committee constituted to make probe regarding the 2 allegations levelled against the petitioner exonerated the petitioner. Accordingly, the Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, District Division II, Bikaner under communication dated 19.12.2008 made a recommendation to the Addl. Chief Engineer, PWD, Bikaner Division, Bikaner to take appropriate decision in the matter. The Addl. Chief Engineer vide a communication dated 19.12.2008 forwarded the matter to the Chief Engineer, PWD, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur for taking a further appropriate decision. It is stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that no action is yet taken by the respondents relating to the inquiry conducted against the petitioner. It is also stated that the respondents have yet not taken any decision as per Rule 54 of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951 regarding payment of wages to the petitioner for the period he faced suspension i.e. from 6.6.2003 to 13.8.2004. Admit. Issue notice. Sh. Mukul Singhvi, learned Standing Counsel for the Public Works Department under instructions of the Court accepts notice. The matter is also heard for final disposal. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was placed under suspension on 6.6.2003, and this Court by its order dated 11.8.2004 in 3 SBCivil Writ Petition No.2854/2003 stayed operation and effect of the order of suspension referred above. In pursuant to the interim directions passed by this Court the petitioner was reinstated in service, and as such, it was obligatory upon the respondents to take a decision regarding payment of wages beyond the subsistence allowance already paid as per provisions of Rule 54 of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951. The respondents are also under obligation to take appropriate decision with regard to disciplinary action taken against the petitioner after submission of the report of inquiry by the competent inquiry officer/committee. From perusal of the documents annexed with petition for writ it appears that the inquiry committee has already exonerated the petitioner and Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, District Division-II, Bikaner as well as the Addl. Chief Engineer, Public Works Department, Bikaner have already forwarded entire matter to the Chief Engineer, Public Works Department. A decision, thus, is required to be taken by the Chief Engineer relating to the disciplinary action for which the petitioner was subjected. In view of whatever stated above, I consider it appropriate to direct the respondents to decide the issue relating to payment of salary beyond the subsistence allowance already paid to the petitioner for the period from 6.6.2003 to 13.8.2004, the period in which the petitioner suffered suspension. The respondents are further directed to take 4 appropriate decision with regard to the disciplinary action taken against the petitioner expeditiously as far as possible on or before 1.7.2009. With the directions above, the petition for writ is disposed of. (GOVIND MATHUR), J. Jgoyal '