(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI) 1. We have heard Mr.Yatin Oza, Senior counsel assisted by Mr. B.P.Gupta appearing for the appellant, Ms.Jirga Jhaveri, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for respondent nos.1 to 3 and Mr.Chetan Pandya, learned counsel appearing for respondent no.4.
2. The appellant was working as Deputy Mamlatdar in the office of District Supply Officer, Gandhinagar. An FIR was lodged on 6.10.2002 against District Supply Officer that he was demanding money for increasing transportation charges. Though the appellant was arrayed as accused, but in the body of the FIR that the appellant had not demanded money for increasing transportation nor he was a competent authority to increase transportation charges. The only allegation against the appellant is that the amount was to be paid to DSO. The appellant was suspended by the order dated 9.10.2002. A criminal case was pending against him. Special case (ACB) No.2 of 2003 was registered on the basis of the FIR and the appellant was acquitted by judgment dated 18.7.2006 granting benefit of doubt and a further direction was issued by the Principal District Judge directing the Government of Gujarat to initiate regular departmental action for major penalty against the appellant as well as District Supply Officer D.A.Shah. The State of Gujarat filed Criminal Revision Application No.267 of 2007 challenging the judgment dated 18.7.2006 passed in Special ACB case no.2 of 2003. Criminal Revision Application was allowed by judgment dated 12.10.2007 and the observations made in para 41(D) of the judgment dated 18.7.2006 wherein it was directed to take departmental proceedings against the appellant and District Supply Officer were quashed. The judgment became final and binding between the parties. Therefor, no action can be taken by the respondents now in pursuance of this judgment. No departmental proceedings can be taken. Further, the appellant has been acquitted in the criminal case, therefor, suspension order deserves to be quashed.
3. In view of the judgment passed in Special (ACB) case no.2 of 2003 decided on 18.7.2006 and the judgment rendered in Criminal Revision Application no.267 of 2007 on 2.10.2007, no departmental proceedings can be taken against the appellant on the basis of the allegations made in the FIR and the suspension order dated 9.10.2002 deserves to be quashed.
4. In the result, this Appeal succeeds and is allowed. The order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 6.2.2004 in Special Civil Application No.14713 of 2003 is set aside. The suspension order dated 9.10.2002 is also set aside with all consequential benefits of service to the appellant.
(V.M.SAHAI,J) (A.J.DESAI,J) ***vcdarji