Suspending Public Representative On Suspicion Of Corruption Without Proof Will Be Detrimental To Those Who Elected Him: Rajasthan High Court

The Rajasthan High Court allowed a petition filed by the Chairman, Municipal Board, Jaitaran, against his suspension owing to an allegation of illegality in issuing pattas, and opined that the suspension of a public representative on mere allegations of irregularities would be detrimental to the public at large.

Justice Kuldeep Mathur observed that a public representative was expected to work with the aid and advice of government officials. If an act was done by the elected representatives when the files were placed before him/her after examination of documents by government officials, it was normally expected of him/her to accept the same unless something contrary was brought on record. 

The Court held that if a public representative was allowed to be suspended on mere complaints or suspicion of committing irregularities without any specific allegation of corruption or proof in support, it would be against the public's wishes and also detrimental to the representative's own interest, as they would not get a full tenure. The court said:

"If a public representative is allowed to be suspended on mere complaints or suspicion of committing irregularities without any specific allegation of corruption or proof in support thereof then the same would not only be against the wishes of the public at large which had elected him but will also be detrimental to his own interest as he would not get full tenure in the office to discharge the public work for which he has been elected."

It was the case of the petitioner that he was suspended on account of the allegations of illegality in the issuance of pattas. This was challenged, and the order was eventually stayed by the Court.

Subsequently, based on another complaint regarding the issuance of certain residential pattas, in alleged violation of the master plan and the procedure under relevant rules and township policy 2010, he was again put under suspension.

It was argued that in the report submitted by the Executive Officer, Municipal Board, no definitive conclusion regarding the issuance of pattas was made. Yet, taking this report as the basis, he was put under suspension for alleged illegality in issuing pattas for 58 residential plots.

The Court stated that the mere availability of the power to suspend did not automatically mean that suspension must be imposed. It was a discretionary power to be exercised cautiously and judiciously.

In this background, the State was directed to seal the entire record of the proceedings and place it before a judicial official who was expected to expeditiously conduct the judicial inquiry against the petitioner.

Accordingly, the petition was allowed, and the suspension of the petitioner was set aside.

Title: Ramswaroop Bhati v State of Rajasthan & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Raj) 328

Click Here To Read/Download Order