Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

PREM PAL SHARMA versus STATE OF UP THRU' SECY. REVENUE AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Prem Pal Sharma v. State Of Up Thru' Secy. Revenue And Others - WRIT - A No. 60407 of 2005 [2005] RD-AH 2716 (12 September 2005)

 

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).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

HON. ARUN TANDON, J.

Heard Sri Madhusudan Dixit Advocate on behalf of the petitioner, Standing Counsel on behalf of the respondents.

Petitioner Prem Pal Sharma, who is working as Lekhpal, Tehsil Kol, District Aligarh, is aggrieved by an order of suspension pending enquiry, passed by the Up Zila Adhikari, Kol, Aligarh dated 5.9.2005.

On behalf of the petitioner it is contended that the charges as leveled against the petitioner are factually not correct. The exchange of the land of the Gaon Sabha at the side of the main road has been effected in the interest of the Gaon Sabha in accordance with Section 161 of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act and therefore suspension is uncalled for.

I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the records of the writ petition.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, court is satisfied that the charges as levelled against the petitioner cannot be said to be vague or insignificant in nature.

It cannot be said at this stage that if the charges levelled against the petitioner are proved, they may not result in any major penalty being imposed against the petitioner. The issue as to whether the exchange of land was effected in the interest of Gaon Sabha or that the petitioner has acted bonafidely, shall be adjudicated during the disciplinary proceedings. This Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India at this stage cannot go into the said issue. Writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, it would be in the interest of justice to direct the respondents to complete the departmental proceedings initiated against the petitioner, preferably within four months from the date a certified copy of this order is filed before the authority concerned. It is made clear that the opinion expressed by this Court is tentative in nature and shall not effect the departmental proceedings or the decision to be taken by the authorities concerned thereafter.    

12.9.2005

Pkb/60407


Copyright

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

Advertisement

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 |

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