High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Ram Prakash Singh v. State Of U.P. And Another - WRIT - A No. 48040 of 2006  RD-AH 15501 (6 September 2006)
Civil Misc.Writ Petition No.48040 of 2006
Ram Prakash Singh vs State of U.P. and another.
: Present :
( Hon. Mr.Justice Amitava Lala and Hon.Mr.Justice V.C.Misra )
: Appearance :
For the Petitioner ....... Sri D.V.Singh
For the Respondents ....... Chief Standing Counsel
Amitava Lala,J.- From an order dated 21st February, 2006 passed by a Division Bench of this High Court in connection with the matter of one Sri R.N.Singh and others vide Civil Misc.Writ Petition No. 7883 of 2006 it appears that an order was passed for an investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation (hereinafter called as C.B.I.) by observing that they will be free to question the Vice Chairman, Secretary and other officers posted in Lucknow Development Authority in the relevant period with regard to matters in question. It appears to this court that from such order a Special Leave Petition was filed before the Supreme Court wherein the order was passed on 4th August, 2006, which is quoted hereunder.
Heard petitioner's counsel.
The petitioner has challenged the order by which the earlier stay of suspension was vacated. Now the petitioner is under suspension and prays for revocation of that order. We see no reason to interfere with the present S.L.P. as it is preferred against an interim order. Accordingly, the special leave petition is dismissed. However, counsel for the petitioner submits that the departmental enquiry is pending against the petitioner and it is continuing since a long period. We direct the respondents to expedite the departmental proceedings at the earliest and pass appropriate orders within a period of four months.
The special leave petition is disposed of."
The petitioner contended that he is also involved in the inquiry proceeding initiated in the year 2002 at first. He was not involved in the C.B.I. inquiry. The charge sheet is pending from 23.3.2002 in which reply was given but no step has been taken. Another charge sheet was given on 21st February, 2006 even to the same reply has already been filed. However, no decision has been taken as yet. It is further contended by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that although in the case of R.N.Singh (supra) reply not was filed, even then Supreme Court was pleased to direct to expedite the departmental proceedings at the earliest but not beyond four months. In the present case when reply has already filed can be given by this court to conclude the inquiry proceedings.
Learned Chief Standing Counsel contended before this Court that a supplementary charge sheet is to be issued. We are neither concerned whether any involvement of the C.B.I. inquiry is there in the case of the petitioner or which agency will do the needful. We are only concerned about fixation of time period for completing disciplinary proceeding. Since the Supreme Court has fixed the period of four months from the date i.e. 4th August, 2006, it is desirable and to keep parity we pass an order that the inquiry and disciplinary proceeding should be completed within such period as fixed by the Supreme Court.
With the above observation the writ petition is disposed of.
No order is passed as to costs.
( Justice Amitava Lala )
( Justice V.C.Misra )
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.