Permanent Lok Adalat Member Facing Serious Charges Can Be Suspended Even If No Suspension Provision Exists: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has recently observed that merely because there is no specific provision to suspend a member of the Permanent Lok Adalat, it does not mean that one cannot be suspended even when there are such serious charges against him/her.

The Bench of Justice Rajan Roy and Justice Saurabh Lavania was hearing a plea by one Kamlesh Kumar Dixit who challenged his suspension from the membership of Permanent Lok Adalat, Unnao after a preliminary inquiry found him prima facie guilty of taking illegal gratification of Rs. 5000/-

In the inquiry conducted by OSD, UPSLSA, it was also found that he was involved in misconduct with other Permanent Lok Adalat officials and causing the disappearance of a Court file.

By the same order, a final inquiry has been instituted against him and Chairman/District Judge, District Legal Service Authority, Unnao has been designated as inquiry officer

The office held by him is a tenured office and prior to being nominated for the office of Member, Permanent Lok Adalat, he was an Advocate practicing at Unnao itself.

It was contended by him before the Court that there is no provision for suspension of a Member of the Permanent Lok Adalat although there is a provision for his removal based on an inquiry as per Rule 5 of Permanent Lok Adalat (Other Terms and Conditions of Appointment of Chairman and Other Persons) Rules, 2003.

Court's order

Considering the nature of the allegations against the petitioner, the Court observed that it was not in the interest of the functioning of the Permanent Lok Adalat at Unnao to allow the petitioner to continue to function during the pendency of the inquiry.

Further, the Court observed that even if there is no provision to suspend such a member, it doesn't mean that one cant be suspended if there are serious allegations against the person.

"Restraining him from working or suspending him from work is implied in the very term of appointment especially in the facts of the present case," the Court added.

Therefore, considering the larger interest of the functioning of Permanent Lok Adalat and the citizens who appear before it, the Court was not inclined to exercise our extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

However, the Court directed that the final inquiry which had been instituted shall be completed at the earliest provided the petitioner cooperates in the same and based on such inquiry a final decision shall be taken by the competent authority expeditiously and expected that the exercise \be completed within 2 months.

Case title - Kamlesh Kumar Dixit v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Law, Lko. & Ors

Click Here to Download Order

Read Order