1. Leave to place the order on record.
2. This petition is preferred under Article-227 of the Constitution by the petitioner, seeking following reliefs:
"A) admit this petition;
B) issue appropriate writ, order or direction and be pleased to quash and set aside the order/communication dated 5/1/2012 passed by respondent no.3 herein as the same is violative of principle of natural justice and violative of Article-14 of the Constitution of India and the same has been passed without compliance of requirement of Rule-5 of Gujarat Civil Services (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1971;
C) issue appropriate writ, order or direction and be pleased to hold that the communication dated 5/1/2012 issued by respondent no.2 to respondent no.6 is misinterpreted and misreading of the communication/order dated 4/1/2012 issued by the Under Secretary, Forest & Environment Department, Gandhinagar and therefore, be pleased to hold that no order of suspension could have been passed without holding inquiry as per the order/communication dated 4/1/2012 and therefore, be pleased to hold that the concerned respondent authorities had no right or authority to pass order of suspension of the petitioner without holding inquiry and therefore said action of the concerned authorities may be held as violative of communication issued by the Under Secretary, State of Gujarat dated 4/1/2012;
D) grant interim relief and be pleased to grant stay of further implementation, operation and execution of the suspension order dated 5/1/2012 passed by respondent no.3;
E) pass such orders as thought fit in the interest of justice."
3. Shri N.K. Majmudar, learned advocate for the petitioner has made submissions on the line of petition. However, he further submitted that though the challenge made in this petition is to the order of suspension, subsequent development indicates that inquiry has culminated into the filing of the complaint against the present petitioner. He further submitted that another petition was preferred being Special Civil Application No.5783 of 2012 which has already been decided by this Court (Coram: K.M. Thakar, J.) on 23.04.2012, where this petitioner has been permitted to approach the authority, as per paragraphs-19 and 20 of the order in the following manner:
"19. So far as the petitioner is concerned, it is open to him to raise all contentions available in law including the option if he so chooses to rely on the order dated 01/12/2008 and raise contention on that basis, however, having regard to the nature and scope of the notice dated 29/03/2012 or that the petitioner is called upon to reply and give his response as to proposed penalty.
20. After the petitioner submits his reply raising all contentions available in law, if any order is passed against the petitioner then it would be open to the petitioner to challenge said order on all available contentions and grounds including the ground that he is entitled to not to disclose his defence and that is why he does not propose to give any reply on merits."
4. In wake of the above mentioned development, learned advocate on instructions seeks to withdraw this petition with a liberty to approach the concerned authorities by raising all possible contentions available in the petition.
5. Permission is granted as prayed for. On his raising such contentions, the respondent authorities shall duly consider the same in accordance with law.
6. It is being specified that this Court has expressed no opinion on merit of this petition. Petition stands disposed of as withdrawn.
(MS SONIA GOKANI,J) bina/cmk* Top