1 SB Civil Writ Petition No.3342/2009 Abhay Singh. vs. State of Raj. & Ors. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3342/2009 Abhay Singh. vs. State of Rajasthan and others. Date : 1.5.2009 HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA, J. Mr.RS Charan, for the petitioner. Mr.Ravi Bhansali ) for the respondents Mr.Sudhir Tak ) - - - - - Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner is holding the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police in the Government of Rajasthan. He was selected for going to United Nations in U.N. Mission which was duly communicated to the petitioner vide communication dated 20.2.2009 sent by the respondent no.3. That Mission is for one year and the petitioner was supposed to go by 23.3.2009. An F.I.R. was lodged against the petitioner on 13.3.2009 and a case was registered by the Dy. Superintendent of Police, ACB, Churu. Copy of F.I.R has not been filed but 2 SB Civil Writ Petition No.3342/2009 Abhay Singh. vs. State of Raj. & Ors. has been shown by learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner approached this Court against registration of case against him by preferring SB Criminal Misc. Petition No.584/2009 wherein interim order has been passed :- “Meanwhile, no coercive steps be taken against the petitioner.” Then, the petitioner received one communication dated 1.4.2009, by which he has been communicated by the Government of India that in view of the withdrawal of vigilance clearing by D.G.P., Rajasthan vide order dated 25.3.2009, he is directed to report to D.G.P. with immediate effect. The grievance of the petitioner is that because of withdrawal of that vigilance clearing, the petitioner cannot go to attend U.N. Mission in Haiti. Sending a person on U.N. Mission may have its own value and when the petitioner is facing a criminal case and that too under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act and if the administrative authorities and the police have decided to withdraw the vigilance clearing of the petitioner, then it cannot be said to be a step 3 SB Civil Writ Petition No.3342/2009 Abhay Singh. vs. State of Raj. & Ors. taken by the respondents as coercive step. The administrative decisions are required to be taken by the employer in their own wisdom by taking into account of relevant facts. In view of the above reasons, I do not find any merit in this writ petition and the same is hereby dismissed. (PRAKASH TATIA), J. S.Phophaliya