Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Satyaveer Singh Rathi v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. 21833 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 8941 (10 May 2007)


This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).


Hon'ble Ashok Bhushan, J.

Heard counsel for the petitioner .

By this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 16.4.2007 by the petitioner has been suspended in contemplation of disciplinary enquiry.  Learned counsel for the petitioner challenging the order contended that the charges on the basis of which the petitioner has been suspended  are not made out. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the inspection report of Deputy Director (Pashupalan) dated 7.3.2007.   On the basis of the said report  he submits that the charges are not made out and the suspension was not justified.  I am afraid that this Court at this stage cannot enter into the correctness  or otherwise of the charges. Prima facie, the allegations are  there in the suspension order  on which the enquiry is contemplated. In fact charge sheet dated 20.4.2007 has already been served  on the petitioner  which has been filed as Annexure-5 to the writ petition . The enquiry proceedings are also going on which enquiry contains four charges.  Those grounds on which the petitioner challenged the suspension order  are not substantive grounds  for interference with the order dated 16.4.2007.   However, it is always open for the petitioner to pray for revocation of the suspension order  from the authorities bringing into his notice all the relevant facts . Learned counsel for the petitioner lastly   contended that the petitioner has grievance with regard to Enquiry Officer.  It is open for the petitioner to make an application before the disciplinary authority  with regard to change of Enquiry Officer.  I do not find any error in the suspension order  warranting interference by this Court  Under Article 226 of the Constitution.

The writ petition lacks merit and is dismissed.




Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.