The Rajasthan High Court has ruled that the suspension of civil servants under the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1958, must be exercised with due caution and only after recording the necessary reasons for such action.

The Single-Judge Bench of Justice Vinit Kumar Mathur held that suspending a civil servant without properly documented reasons, or solely based on instructions from circulars, word of mouth, or a slip of the pen, constitutes a colorable exercise of power.

"It is for the competent authority to examine facts of each and every case and to settle desirability to place an incumbent under suspension by applying objective discretion. The suspension of an employee, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case may be desired urgently or on emergent basis but in those circumstances also the competent authority must record its satisfaction for exercising powers under Rule 13 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1958. If such satisfaction is not recorded and suspension is made merely on the basis of the instructions given in circulars or merely by a word of mouth or by slip of pen, then that is nothing but colourable exercise of power," the Court said.

"The suspension of a Government servant cannot be made in a mechanical and casual way as has been done in the present case to pacify the anger and anguish of the villagers. The anticipation of the Inquiry is sinequa-non but in the present case, the petitioner has not even been issued a charge-sheet till date," the Bench further observed.

The Court quashed the suspension of a Range Forest Officer (the petitioner). The officer had been suspended following a compromise between the government department and local villagers, which was intended to pacify tensions after the officer filed an FIR related to deer poaching in his area.

The Court observed that the suspension was ordered without any application of mind and was solely based on the compromise deed, which demonstrated a complete lack of due diligence by the authority. "The suspension though is not a punishment but is required to be effected with due caution and vigilance and a civil servant could not be placed under suspension without due application of mind and without examining the need to do so," it said.

The Bench noted that such an unwarranted suspension not only deprived the government of the officer's services but also imposed an unnecessary financial burden on the public fund in the form of subsistence allowance. The Bench opined that the suspension order is required to be passed after taking into consideration the entire facts of the matter and after due application of mind which is conspicuously absent in the present matter.

Furthermore, the Court highlighted that the suspension order was issued by an incompetent authority—the Additional Chief Conservator of Forest—instead of the petitioner's appointing authority, the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest.

"Further, the order dated 21.06.2024 has been passed by the Additional Chief Conservator of Forest (HQ), Rajasthan, whereas, the appointing authority of the petitioner, who is working as Range Forest Officer Grade-II, as per the Rules, is Principal Chief Conservator of Forest. Therefore, the order of suspension has been issued by an authority who is incompetent as per the Rules making it unsustainable in the eyes of law," the Court said.

The Court concluded that the suspension was executed in a mechanical and casual manner, solely to appease the villagers, and was therefore unsustainable in law. Consequently, the petition was allowed, and the suspension order was quashed.

Cause Title: Ashok Singh v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. [Neutral Citation No: 2024:RJ-JD:35339]

Appearance:-

Petitioner: Advocate Parmendra Bohra

Respondent: AAG Mahaveer Bishnoi,

Click here to read/download the Order


Justice Vinit Kumar MathurRajasthan High Court

Sukriti Mishra