IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARACHAL AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 10 (S/B) of 2006 Bharat Chandra Bhatt S/o Sri K.D. Bhatt, Block Development Officer, attached in the office of chief Development Officer, Hardwar ……..Petitioner Versus 1. State of Uttaranchal through Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Uttaranchal, Dehradun 2. Chief Development Officer, Hardwar ……Respondents Sri Sobhit Saharia, learned counsel for the petitioner. Sri K.P. Upadhyaya, learned standing counsel for the State of Uttaranchal. Dated: March 07, 2006 Hon’ble P.C. Verma, J. Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal,J. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for writ of certiorari quashing the impugned suspension order dated 13.12.2005 passed by Respondent No. 1 which is contained in Annexure No. 6 to this writ petition. 2. Brief facts of the case narrated by the petitioner are that the petitioner was placed under suspension vide order dated 13.12.2005. In the suspension order, it was stated that the disciplinary proceedings are contemplated against the petitioner and a case has been registered against him under Sections 7 and 3(1)D read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. 3. After lodging of the F.I.R. a crime case was registered against the petitioner in respect of which an enquiry relating to the said criminal charge was initiated which is pending against the petitioner. Thereafter, a criminal trial relating to said charge was also commenced against the petitioner which is also pending. During the course of investigation, the petitioner was arrested in a trap case and he was put behind the bars for 48 days. This charge is connected with his position as a Government servant, therefore, this suspension order is squarely covered under Sub Rule(2) of Rule 4 of Uttaranchal Government Servant (Disciplinary and Appeal) Rules, 2003. Sub-rule (2) of Rule 4 of the said Rules, 2003 is quoted below:- “ A Government servant in respect of, or against whom an investigation, inquiry or trial relating to a criminal charge, which is connected with his position as a Government servant or which is likely to embarrass him in the discharge of his duties or which involves moral turpitude, is pending, may, at the discretion of the Appointment Authority or the Authority to whom the power of suspension has been delegated under these rules, be placed under suspension until the termination of all proceedings relating to that charge.” In view of the aforesaid Rule, 2003 and the facts stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the suspension shall stand terminate only after all the proceedings relating to the said charge are culminated. Therefore, in view of the above legal position, the writ petition is devoid of merit and is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs. (B.C. Kandpal, J.) (P.C. Verma, J.) Rajeev Dang