Case Title: R.K. Gupta vs Union Of India And Ors.
Case No.: WPCRL No. 1891/2023
Decided On: 16.01.2024
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjiv Khanna And Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dipankar Datta
Facts of the Case: In the 1971 case of R.K. Gupta vs Union of India and Ors., petitioner R.K. Gupta challenged his suspension ordered by the President of India. The suspension, barring Gupta from leaving New Delhi without permission, cited an ongoing investigation. Gupta alleged mala fide intent, primarily against respondent No. 3, and non-authorization under Central Civil Services Rules. The Court found the suspension not solely at respondent No. 3’s instance but ruled the prerequisite of a pending criminal investigation was unmet, quashing the suspension. The judgment detailed Gupta’s allegations, distinguishing between a preliminary enquiry and a formal investigation, and ordered the cancellation of the suspension, restraining its enforcement. The plea for crossing the efficiency bar was dismissed, and costs were awarded to the petitioner.
Legal Provisions
The court reviewed a suspension decision under Central Civil Services Rules, emphasizing the absence of a valid ongoing criminal investigation. While ruling out malice, the court held that the suspension of respondent No. 3, related to an alleged excessive assets case, lacked the necessary grounds outlined in the rules, citing the distinction between a preliminary inquiry and a formal probe.
Issues
Key legal issues involved allegations of mala fide suspension, examination of rule 10(1)(b) of Central Civil Services Rules, and assessing the necessity of a pending criminal investigation for suspension. The Court ruled the suspension wasn’t mala fide but lacked the prerequisite of a pending criminal investigation, leading to the suspension order being quashed. The distinction between a preliminary inquiry and a formal investigation under the Rules was crucial in the Court’s decision.
Courts analysis and decision
In the 1971 case of R.K. Gupta vs Union of India and Ors., the court analyzed the petitioner’s challenge to his suspension order by the President of India. While dismissing the mala fide allegations against respondent No. 3, the court ruled that the suspension lacked the necessary condition precedent of a pending criminal investigation, as only a preliminary enquiry into Gupta’s alleged disproportionate assets had occurred, not a formal investigation as per the Central Civil Services Rules. The court quashed the suspension order, emphasizing the distinction between preliminary enquiries and formal investigations, and ordered the cancellation of the suspension, restraining its enforcement. The plea for an order to cross the efficiency bar was dismissed, and the petitioner was awarded costs.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by- Aastha Ganesh Tiwari
