Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SUBHASH CHANDRA MISHRA versus CHAIRMAN REGIONAL ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE, REGION BAREILLY

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Subhash Chandra Mishra v. Chairman Regional Administrative Committee, Region Bareilly - WRIT - A No. 10970 of 2003 [2006] RD-AH 11555 (14 July 2006)

 

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. SHISHIR KUMAR, J.

The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for quashing the order-dated 18.1.2003 passed by respondent no.1 suspending the petitioner. The petitioner has challenged the said order of suspension on various grounds.

The writ petition was entertained and Sri H.R. Mishra, counsel for the respondents was granted time to file counter affidavit. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been filed. Dr. H.N. Tripathi who appears for the petitioner has submitted that the charge sheet has already been given but the suspension allowance which is payable to the petitioner is not being paid.

After hearing counsel for the parties it will be appropriate that as the present writ petition is against the order of suspension and the charge sheet has already been given to the petitioner, it will be appropriate that the disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner be completed as early as possible.

In view of the aforesaid fact the writ petition is disposed of with direction to respondent no.2 to complete the disciplinary proceeding against the petitioner preferably within three months. It is also made clear that if the contention of the petitioner to this effect that the suspension allowance is not being paid to the petitioner, the same may be paid immediately to the petitioner   in accordance with law. If the disciplinary proceeding has already been completed, this order may be treated to be inoperative.

With these observations the writ petition is disposed of.

14.7.2006

V.Sri/-

W.P.No. No. 10970 of 2003


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.