G^ J^ Slngle Bench IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) N0.3li 1 2011 PETITIONER 0;^^ ^^w \^'"" RESPONDENTS ^m^.??,] ,• 'A' "£\ / / <^" -^^ .^! Brijnandan Dwivedi, S/o Late Sharda Prasad Dwivedi, aged about 45 years; presently working as Personal Assistant, Sub-Area Manager, Dugga Open-Cast Mines, S.E.C.L., Bhatgaon, P.0.: Bhatgaon, Dtetrict-Surguja (C.G.) VERSUS 1)^ State of Chhattisgarh, Through: The Additional Collector, Surajpur, District-Surguja (C.G.) ^ 2) The Chief General Manager, S.E.C.L. Bhatgaon Area, Office-Bhatgaon/ Jarhi, District-Surguja (C.G.) ^ 3) The Sub-Area Manager, Dugga Open Cast Mines, Bhatgaon, District-Surguja (C.G.) 4) The Chi^f Managing Director, S.E.C.L., Seepat Road, Bilaspur (C.G.) 5) Balam, S/o Shivbhajan, aged about 55 years; Caste- Pahadi Korwa, R/o Batra, P.8.: Jainagar, Tehsil-Surajpur, District-Surguja (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE-226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA c^- r^. -^ --^ ; N J yj ^!^[^T'f^fW WT^H^ST^RT^ '3'^r ^iqi<rf^,.'i$-al^^(o^ fN^nrry 1^1 *im<ir WHK^^A:!S3.^.^1 "^200 ^TCT '^[^ ( ^i^^) ^^TOT ^tef ^n^y SB : Hon'ble Shri Manindra MohanJ 30-06-2011 Shri Ashish Surana, counsel for Shri A. V. Shridhar, Panel Law\ advance copy. Heard. This petition has been filed b^ dated 24-06-2011 (Annexure P-3) Surajpur, District Surguja. I the petitioner. ^er for the State/respondent No.1 on the petitioner aggrieved by order pjassed by the Additional Collector, Learned counsel for the petit which have been made with regard to of forged documents, are baseless. Additional Collector has illegally openi also directed the South Eastern Cc petitioner. Learned counsel for the pet authority is the appointing authority of enquiry and pass orders as to whethei or discipljnary enquiry should beiniti further submits that the complaint is proper opportunity of hearingis not be What 1 find is that some coi Additional Collector, Surajpur. The disciplinary enquiry into the matter afforded opportunity of filing reply (Annexure P-4) shows that the er "^T^ifeNN 'HR^f ^ [k^ <M^l< '^>3TRR3^T ?hriyastava, J. joner submits that the complaints, obtaining employment on the basis ILearned counsel submits that the ^d an enquiry in the matter and has ^al Fields Limited to suspend the jitioner submitted that the competent |the petitioner, who alone can make the petitioner should be suspended initijated against him. Learned counsel being proceeded with hastily and |ng afforded. (nplaint is being made before the Additional Collector is making jand the petitioner has also been Order sheet dated 24-06-2011 tquiry is still pending before the |^ll^,<H-ll^li<<—FS/140—2/2011—1,50,000. ? 5«1 .^'^ 3 'S^ET ^i^i^q, ^Tll-y^^, l^iTHy <<m^tT^»<4T^ •-^200 ^??^T^^ (°^t3^^?) ^^ ^T T^W ^T^lt^T^RTO Tumane ^mw '^ft^a?T^[ .^ ^Fife^N 'RTR^ff ^ ^^t <R»1<^K ^ 3?tRp? 3ii^?r Additional Collector and has not been|concluded> The petitioner is always having an opportunity to satisfy theA(pditional Collector that the complaint is baseless or false. At this stage, 1 am not inclin^d to interi:ere with the disciplinary enquiry, which is being made by th^ Additional Collector in the matter. However, as far as question of susp^nsion or disciplinary action against the petitioner is concemed, it has |to be clarified that the Additional Collector cannot issue such a directio^i and the appointing authority of the petitioner can always Ja»take^into coi|isideration such a direction given by the Additional Collector to form an opi any, including suspension, should bet^ken againstthe petitioner. With the aforesaid observation, (the petition is finally disposed off. hion as to what disdplinary action, if Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge ^\W^ ^^ ^uil^, <l^l^li<<—FS/140—2/2011—1,50,000. •aii.i