VIGILANCE MANUAL VOLUME III - AP Online

486 DECISION - 216
thereupon a fresh suspension order ‘pending inquiry’ was issued by
the State Government in February 1982. The fresh suspension order
was challenged on the contention that it was intended to overcome
the effect of earlier stay granted by the High Court in 1979.
The contention of the Principal was rejected by the Karnataka
High Court pointing out that what was material to decide the case
was the source of power under which the fresh suspension order
was passed. There was enough material on record, not related to
the 1979 criminal case resulting in earlier stay of suspension,
pertaining to the conduct of the Principal subsequent thereto, for the
Government of Karnataka to exercise its powers to place a
Government servant under suspension. The fresh suspension order
was accordingly held valid by the High Court.
(216)
Departmental action and investigation
No bar to hold disciplinary proceedings in respect of a
charge just because criminal investigation is pending.
B. Balaiah vs. DTO, Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation,
1982 (3) SLR KAR 675
The petitioner who was a driver in the service of the Karnataka
State Road Transport Corporation questioned the legality of the
commencement of the disciplinary proceedings against him, when
in respect of the same allegation, investigation under the provisions
of the Criminal Procedure Code was under progress. The substance
of the charge framed against him was that he was a party for
smuggling sandalwood billets through the bus belonging to the
Corporation of which he was a driver.
It was held that there is no bar for the Corporation to hold
disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner in respect of the charge
just because the criminal investigation is under progress in respect
of the same charge.