Full Judgment
Writ Petition No.2592/2013 22.02.2013 Mr.D.K.Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Mr.Rajesh Tiwari, learned Government Advocate for the respondents.
Heard.
In this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the validity of order dated 26.12.2012, by which he has been placed under suspension.
The petitioner also prayed for quashment of charge-sheet dated 18.1.2013.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was posted as Forest Guard in Beat Darodi, Range Vijayraghavgarh, Forest Division Katni.
It is further submitted that a tiger died in an area which is situate adjacent to the area, of which the petitioner is Incharge.
However, with a malafide intention, the respondent No.3 has placed the petitioner under suspension.
It is also submitted that before issuing order of suspension, no enquiry has been held to find as to the involvement of the petitioner in the incident.
It is further submitted that though the petitioner has been served the charge- sheet dated 18.1.2013 however, the same does not contain imputation of charges, list of witnesses and documents annexed with the charge-sheet.
On the other hand, learned Government Advocate submitted that against the order of suspension, an appeal lies under Rule 23 of Madhya Pradesh Civil Service (Classification, Control & Appeal ) Rule 1966, before the Appellate Authority and the imputation of charges, list of witnesses and documents annexed with charge-sheet will be supplied to the petitioner before proceeding further in the departmental enquiry.
Admittedly, against the order of suspension, an appeal lies under Rule 23 of Madhya Pradesh Civil Service (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rule 1966.
I have carefully gone through the averments made in the writ petition.
Except in ground 6.1, no allegations of malafide have been made by the petitioner.
Even the allegations with regard to malafides made in para 6.1 are vague and general in nature.
It is trite law that allegations of malafides has to be properly pleaded and proved.
Burden of establishing malafides is very heavy on the person who alleges it.[ See : Indian Railway Construction Co.LTD.versus Ajay Kumar, (2003) 4 SCC 579].The petitioner has failed to discharge the aforesaid burden.
Besides, in view of availability of efficacious remedy, I am not inclined to interfere with the order of suspension.
As stated by learned Government Advocate imputation of charges, list of witnesses and documents annexed with charge-sheet shall be supplied to the petitioner within a period of three weeks from today before taking any further proceeding in the departmental enquiry.
It is further directed that in case the petitioner prefers an appeal against the order of suspension dated 26.12.2012 before the Appellate Authority within a period of 10 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order passed today, the same shall be dealt with by the Appellate Authority in accordance with law, expeditiously preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of filing of such an appeal, by a speaking order.
With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.
Certified copy as per rules.
(Alok Aradhe) Judge RC.