High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
M. R. Siddique v. State Of U.P. & Others - WRIT - A No. 21915 of 2002  RD-AH 281 (19 August 2003)
COURT NO. 34
CIVIL MISC. WRIT PETITION NO. 21915 OF 2002
M.R.Siddiqui ------ Petitioner
State of Uttar Pradesh & ors. ------ Respondents
Hon'ble Dr. B.S.Chauhan, J
Hon'ble D.P.Gupta, J.
(By Hon'ble Dr. B.S.Chauhan, J.)
This writ petition has been filed against the impugned suspension order dated 1.4.2002, by which the petitioner has been put under suspension.
Facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that petitioner was put under suspension and enquiry was held against him. This Court vide resolution dated 5th January, 2002 had imposed the punishment of reversion. Subsequently, it came to the notice of the Hon'ble Judges of this Court that the petitioner's father had written letter dated 2.5.2001 (Annex. 1) to His Excellency The President of India and copy thereof was sent to Hon'ble the Chief Justice making scandalous allegations against the Hon'ble Enquiring Judge that he was most communal and vindictive. The petitioner's wife also wrote a letter on the same date to the Hon'ble the Chief Justice of India making the same allegations of victimization on communal grounds and apprehending further victimization by the High Court. Copy of the said letter was also sent to the Hon'ble the Chief Justice. Considering the matter to be serious again it was resolved to put the petitioner under suspension and hold the enquiry on the said charges. The impugned suspension order dated 1st April, 2002 (Annex. 5) was passed. Hence this petition.
Shri Vijai Gautam, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted a large number of issues including that as the letters purported to be written by the father and wife of the petitioner were very much in existence on the date this Court imposed the punishment of reversion, there could be no justification for holding the enquiry on those charges and putting the petitioner under suspension and the petition deserves to be allowed.
On the contrary, Shri Sudhir Agrawal and Shri C.K.Rai, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents have vehemently opposed the submission made on behalf of the petitioner contending that the said letters were not in the knowledge of the Hon'ble Judges while participating in the Full Court Meeting and that the matter was considered to be very serious. While filing this writ petition petitioner has violated the provisions of Chapter XL, Rule 12 and Chapter XXXIX, Rule 2 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 which completely prohibits getting the copy of order/letter/document from any administrative file. It has been submitted that as no copy could have been obtained without prior permission of the Hon'ble the Chief Justice in writing and countersigning by the Registrar General, the copy of the letters written by the Hon'ble Judges to the Hon'ble Chief Justice which have been annexed along with the writ petition, itself amounts to a misconduct holding an independent enquiry. Thus, no interference is called for and the petition is liable to be rejected.
In view of the objections taken by Shri Sudhir Agrawal, learned counsel appearing for the High Court we had asked the petitioner to explain as how could he procure the photo copy of the said letters written by the Hon'ble Judges to the Hon'ble Chief Justice in contravention of the aforesaid Rules. He has filed an affidavit that the said copies were given to him by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Naseemuddin, who has now retired.
We have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
In spite of serious objections raised by Shri Sudhir Agrawal, we are not inclined to hold enquiry into the correctness of the affidavit filed by the petitioner as the Hon'ble Judge who has supplied the copy thereof has retired and it will be embarrassing for this Court to go into this issue. Shri Sudhir Agrawal has submitted that the enquiry report has already been submitted and the copy thereof had already been furnished to the petitioner and he has filed objection/ representation against the said enquiry report.
Considering the gravity and nature of the charges against the petitioner, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned suspension order. As the enquiry is at the verge of conclusion, we request the learned Registrar General of this Court to place the matter before the appropriate Authority for further action expeditiously.
With these observations, the petition stands disposed of.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.