STATE OF ORISSA AND ORS. versus SHIVA PARASHAD DAS AND ORS.

Citation: [1985] 2 S.C.R. 962 · Decided: 22-02-1985 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: D.A. DESAI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
962 
STATE OF ORISSA AND ORS. 
v. 
SHIVA PARASHAD DAS AND ORS. 
F'ebruary 22, 1985 
[D.A. DESAI, AP. SEN AND V. BALAKRISHNA ERADI, JJ.] 
Constitution of India, 1950, Article 311 ([)-Scope of-Suspension 
order passed against a government servant is not violative of Art. 311(1). 
Civil Senices-
Orissa Civil Services (CCA) Rules, 1962, Rule 12-GoJt. servant-Suspen· 
slon of-Whether can be suspended by an authority subordinate to the appointing 
authority. 
The respondent in C.A. No. 201 of 1977, was appointed as a Forester 
by the Conservator of Forests. He was placed under suspension pending 
enquiry into charges of negligence of duties on 26.2.1969 by the District 
Forest Officer under whom he was working. He challenged berore the High 
Court under Art. 226 the validity of the order of suspension on the ground 
(i) that the order was made in contravention of Art. 311 of the Constitu-
tion; and (ii) that it was also violative of Rule 12 of the Orissa Civil 
Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1962. The High Court 
while rejecting the second contention held that the order was violative of 
clause (1) of Art, 311 inasmuch as the respondent could not have been 
validly suspended from service by the District Forest Officer, who is an 
authority subordinate to the authority which originally appointed him 
namely the Conservator of Forests. The question of Jaw raised 
in C.A. 
No. 200 (N)/71 is also identical • 
• 
Allowing the appeals, 
HELD : (1) An order or suspension passed against a Government 
servant pending disciplinary enquiry is neither one ·of dismissal nor of 
removal from service within Art. 311 of the Constitution. Clause (I) of Art. 
311 will get attracted only when a person who is a member of Civil Service 
of the Union or an All India Service or a Civil Service of a State or one 
who bolds a civil post under the Union or a State is 'dismissed' or 'removed 
from service. The provisions of the said clause have no application whatever 
to a situation where a Goveromeat servant has been merely placed under 
_ _...., ... 
ORISSA v. SHIVA PRASAD (V. Balakrishna Eradi, J.) 
963 
suspension pending departmental enquiry since such action does not constitute 
either dismissal or removal from service. [964E·G] 
(2) The High Court was right in rejecting the second contention or 
the respondent. 
Rule 12 of the Rules lays down that any authority 
empowered by the Governor or the appointing authority in that behalf may 
place a government servant under suspeosion1 where a disciplinary proceed-
ing against him is either contemplated or is pending. In the instant case, it 
is not in dispute that under a Notification issued by the State Government 
in exercise of the powers conferred by Rule 11 of the Rules, the District 
Forest Officer was constituted "the appointing authority'' in respect of 
Foresters with effect from 7.5.1962. It is therefore clear that on the date 
on which the impugned order of suspension was passed-26.2.1969, the 
District Forest Officer under whom the respondent was working in the 
Ohumsur North Division was fully competent to pass the impugned order 
of suspension. [964H; 965A-C] 
Mohammad Ghouse v. State af Andhra Pradesh [1957] S.C.R, 414 followed. 
CIVIL 
APPELL.ATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 200 (N) 
A 
B 
c 
of 1971. 
D 
From the Judgment and Order dated 1. 5. 1970 of the Orissa 
High Court iu 0. J.C. No. !01/70. 
AND 
Civil Appeal No. 201 of 1971 
From the Judgment and Order dated 28.4.70 of the Orissa High 
Court in O.J.C. No. 10/70. 
G. S. Chatterjee for the appellants in both the appeals. 
Ex-Parte for the respondents in both the appeals. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
BALAKRISHNA ERA.DI J. In these two appeals filed by Special 
leave against two judgments of the Orissa High Court, the question 
raised is identical namely, whethe1 an order of suspension from 
service passed against a Government servant falls within the scope 
and purview of Art. 311 of the Constitution. The judgment appe-
aled against in Civil Appeal No. 201 of 1971 is prior in point of 
time and in the judgment under challenge in C. A. No. 200 of 1971 
the High Court has merely followed the former judgment. We shall, 
therefore, refer only to the facts relating to C. A. No. 201 of 1971. 
E 
F 
G 
ff 
[I 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
964 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(1985) 2 S.C.R. 
The respondent-Shri Ram Parshad-was appointed as a 
Forester by the Conservator of Forests, Berhampur,

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.