1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.264/2002. : : Mohanlal Gora Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. : : Date of Order 20.11.2008 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Mr.P.K.Sharma for the petitioner. Mr.Hemant Gupta, Addl.Govt.Counsel for the State. Heard learned counsel for the parties. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order of his suspension dated 29.12.2001. The petitioner who was appointed as Teacher Grade-III with Panchayat Samiti, Dhond on 18.12.1993. He was temporarily given the duties of Secretary of Gram Panchayat, Nagwa by order dated 3.1.2001. This order states that apart from the petitioner, Rameshwar Lal, another teacher in the same village would also discharge the duties of the Secretary. According to the petitioner the meeting of Gram Panchayat was held on 26.1.2001 in which Smt.Geeta Devi was also present. Some members of the opposite group also attended the said meeting and they opposed the action of the Sarpanch. When the meeting went out of her control the 2 opposite group started raising hue and cry and then followed the quarrel between two groups. The Sarpanch lodged First Information Report with the police station. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that after lapse of about one year on 4.1.2002, show cause notice was served upon the petitioner that he was guilty of irregularities due to which the aforesaid incident took place on 26.1.2001. The petitioner submitted reply on 11.12.2001 denying all the allegations. The Development Officer of Panchayat Samiti, Dhond issued a show cause notice that the Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat, Nagwa made complaint against him. The petitioner again submitted explanation on 1.2.2001. He was suddenly placed under suspension on 29.12.2001 in contemplation of departmental enquiry. The petitioner was never associated with any such enquiry inasmuch as operation of the suspension order was stayed by this Court vide order dated 9.1.2002 but till date no disciplinary proceeding has been initiated against the petitioner. It was argued that the petitioner was victim of group rivalry between two groups of the politics of Gram Panchayat, who were fighting to gain control over the proceedings and this happened due to intra politics. The petitioner in any case cannot be held responsible because the 3 respondents have not taken any further disciplinary action against the petitioner even after lapse of more than seven years. The order of suspension be therefore quashed and set aside. Though the show cause notice in this petition was issued to the respondents as far as back on 9.1.2002 the respondents have not till date filed any reply. In any case, an order of suspension cannot be prolonged for an indefinite period. The petitioner was suspended on 29.1.2001. Even if the order of suspension was stayed there was no impediment in initiating disciplinary proceedings. The order of suspension when it was originally passed in the year 2001 may have been justified but by lapse of such a long time particularly when the respondents have not even initiated the disciplinary proceedings, has been rendered arbitrary and, therefore, illegal. Such an order cannot be sustained. In the result, the impugned order dated 29.12.2001 is quashed and set aside. The respondents would be at liberty to proceed against the petitioner and initiate departmental enquiry if they want to do so. This writ petition is accordingly allowed. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ)J. A.Arora/-Item No.14.