High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Mohd. Haneef Ansari v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. 4617 of 2006  RD-AH 5360 (26 March 2007)
Hon. Pankaj Mithal, J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri S.K. Shukla, learned counsel for respondent No.2.
The petitioner was under suspension vide impugned order dated 3.10.2005 on account of contemplated disciplinary inquiry. The said disciplinary inquiry is still pending and it has been contended that the petitioner is not cooperating and is absconding with the entire records.
The order of suspension is not an order of punishment, it has not been stated anywhere in the writ petition that it has been passed with mala fide intention or it is without jurisdiction.
In view of the above, there is no scope for interference with the impugned order, as such the writ petition lacks merit and is dismissed. However, it is observed that the disciplinary inquiry pending against the petitioner since 2005, shall be completed as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of the certificate of copy of this order provided the petitioner cooperates.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.