SCA/10782/1998 1/9 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 10782 of 1998 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 10784 of 1998 To SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 10786 of 1998 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 10793 of 1998 To SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 10795 of 1998 For Approval and Signature: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE ABHILASHA KUMARI ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ========================================================= B M RAIYANI - Petitioner Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & 2 - Respondents ========================================================= Appearance : MR KG SHAH for MR TUSHAR MEHTA for Petitioner in each petition. MS REETA CHANDARANA, AGP, for Respondents : 1 – 2 in Spl.C.A.Nos.10782/98, 10784/98, 10785/98, 10786/98, 10793/98 MS TN KACHCHHI, AGP, for Respondents 1-2 in Spl.C.A.No.10794/98 & 10795/98. RULE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 3, ========================================================= CORAM : HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE ABHILASHA KUMARI SCA/10782/1998 2/9 JUDGMENT Date : 02/09/2008 ORAL COMMON JUDGMENT These petitions have been filed by the petitioners with the prayer to set aside the separate orders of suspension dated 11th December, 1998 in respect of each petitioner, which have been annexed to the petitions as Annexure-A. 2. For the sake of convenience, facts as narrated in Special Civil Application No. 10782/1998 only are being noticed. The petitioner in this petition was working as an Assistant Engineer, Irrigation Scheme, Division No.2, Amreli. He was posted in the scheme known as `Vadi Irrigation Scheme', Taluka & District : Amreli. According to the petitioner, he was placed under suspension on baseless allegations. At the time of filing the petition, departmental inquiry had not yet commenced and, therefore, the only order of suspension has been challenged, in this as well as other connected petitions. 3. Rule was issued on 30th December, 1998. By order SCA/10782/1998 3/9 JUDGMENT of that date, this Court directed that in case the petitioners make any representation against their respective orders of suspension before the Chief Secretary, the same shall be considered and decided in accordance with law, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of their respective representations. Accordingly, the petitioners made their respective representations which were rejected by the Chief Secretary, Government of Gujarat by order dated 12th February, 1999. It is stated in the said order that after having considered the representations of the petitioners, the Government has decided to continue them on suspension. 4. When the petitions came up for final hearing on 14.8.2008, a request was made by the learned counsel for the petitioners to adjourn them in order to enable him to take appropriate instructions. On the next date of hearing i.e. 29.8.2008, the learned A.G.P. made a request that the matters may be adjourned in order to enable her to take instructions. SCA/10782/1998 4/9 JUDGMENT 5. Today, when the petitions are taken up for final hearing, Ms.Reeta Chandarana, learned A.G.P., has submitted an affidavit filed by Mr.H.N.Chaudhary, Under Secretary, Narmada Water Resources, Water Supply & Kalpsar Department, Sachivalaya, Gandhinagar affirmed on 2nd September, 2008, which is taken on record. A copy of this affidavit has also been supplied to Mr.K.G.Shah, learned advocate for Mr.Tushar Mehta, learned counsel for the petitioners. A perusal of this affidavit, makes it abundantly clear that the petitions do not now survive for the reasons stated in the said affidavit. This position is also accepted by Mr.K.G.Shah, learned advocate, for Mr.Tushar Mehta, learned counsel for the petitioners. The relevant recitals made in the affidavit are reproduced hereinbelow: Special Civil Application No. 10782/1998 filed by Mr.B.M.Raiyani: He was suspended on 11.12.1998 and the charge sheet was issued to him on 14.06.1999 and he was reinstated on 09.04.2002. His suspension period was regularized on 26.06.2002 and his suspension period was treated as on duty and on completion of departmental inquiry, he was exonerated on SCA/10782/1998 5/9 JUDGMENT 09.03.2001. He is still in service. Special Civil Application No. 10784/1998 filed by Mr.K.J.Thaker: He was suspended on 11.12.1998 and the charge sheet was issued to him on 14.06.1999 and he was reinstated on 09.04.2002. His suspension period was regularized on 26.06.2002 and his suspension period was treated as on duty and on completion of departmental inquiry, he was exonerated on 09.03.2001. He is still in service. Special Civil Application No. 10785/1998 filed by Mr.P.L.Makwana: He was suspended on 11.12.1998 and the charge sheet was issued to him on 14.06.1999 and he was reinstated on 02.04.2004. His suspension period was regularized on 22.07.2008. It is stated that the order of suspension from 22.07.2008, after the period of suspension he is not entitled to receive any arrears of amount of salary and other allowances and only for pensionary benefit purpose this order is passed and his suspension order is passed. During his suspension period he was not entitled to receive arrears and other allowances, but his suspension period will be considered for his pensionary benefits and increment. For punishment purpose the order was passed on 22.10.2003 and in the said order, one increment was stopped for a period of ten years with future effect. He is still in service. SCA/10782/1998 6/9 JUDGMENT Special Civil Application No. 10786/1998 filed by Mr.B.R.Parekh: He was suspended on 11.12.1998 and the charge sheet was issued to him on 14.06.1999 and he was reinstated on 02.04.2004. His suspension period was regularized on 22.07.2008. It is stated that the order of suspension from 22.07.2008, after the period of suspension he is not entitled to receive any arrears of amount of salary and other allowances and only for pensionary benefit purpose this order is passed and his suspension order is passed. During his suspension period he was not entitled to receive arrears and other allowances, but his suspension period will be considered for his pensionary benefits and increment. Vide order dated 22.10.2003 the petitioner is visited with the punishment and has been ordered to be scaled five stages below in his existing pay scale. He has retired on 31.05.2007. Special Civil Application No. 10793/1998 filed by Mr.C.A.Zala: He was suspended on 11.12.1998 and the charge sheet was issued to him on 29.01.1999. He expired on 19.02.2002. Therefore, the departmental inquiry was dropped as per the direction of Government in General Administration Department. Special Civil Application No. 10794/1998 filed by Mr.A.R.Patel: He was suspended on 11.12.1998 and the charge SCA/10782/1998 7/9 JUDGMENT sheet was issued to him on 14.06.1999 and he was reinstated on 02.04.2004. His suspension period was regularized on 22.07.2008. It is stated that the order of suspension from 22.07.2008, after the period of suspension he is not entitled to receive any arrears of amount of salary and other allowances and only for pensionary benefit purpose this order is passed and his suspension order is passed. During his suspension period he was not entitled to receive arrears and other allowances, but his suspension period will be considered for his pensionary benefits and increment. For punishment purpose the order was passed on 22.10.2003 and in the said order, one increment was stopped for a period of ten years with future effect. He is still in service. Special Civil Application No. 10795/1998 filed by Mr.Y.J.Dabbawala: He was suspended on 11.12.1998 and the charge sheet was issued to him on 14.06.1999 and he was reinstated on 09.04.2002. His suspension period was regularized on 26.06.2002 and his suspension period was treated as on duty and on completion of departmental inquiry, he was exonerated on 09.03.2001. He has expired. 6. A perusal of the above statements made in the affidavit, makes it abundantly clear that the relief claimed by the petitioners for quashing of their SCA/10782/1998 8/9 JUDGMENT respective orders of suspension, does not survive, since in most of the cases, departmental inquiry has already been taken place and has been completed and appropriate orders are passed. In some of the cases, the petitioners have expired and, therefore, the relief claimed also does not survive. In support of the affidavit, copies of suspension orders, punishment orders, reinstatement orders and orders regarding regularization of the suspension periods of the concerned petitioners are annexed as Annexure-R/1 to the affidavit. In view of the affidavit filed by respondent No.1 and in view of the statement made by Mr.K.G.Shah, learned counsel for the petitioners, that the relief prayed for in each of these petitions, does not survive, all the petitions are disposed of as having become infructuous. Needless to say that, if the petitioners are aggrieved by any action of the respondent No.1, after conclusion of the inquiry, it is open to them to challenge the same before the appropriate forum. Rule is discharged in each petition. There shall be no orders as to costs. [Smt.Abhilasha Kumari,J.] SCA/10782/1998 9/9 JUDGMENT (patel)