Court No. - 49
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 24620 of 2019 Petitioner :- Dilip Kumar Bhatiya Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Brijesh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Grijesh Kumar Hon'ble Siddhartha Varma,J.
By means of the instant writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 10.04.2019. He has submitted that the proceeding was initiated on account of the fact that the petitioner had complained against the supply clerk. The further contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that a first information was also lodged against the supply clerk which had maliciously resulted in the impugned order.
Learned Standing Counsel however submits that the writ petition could not be entertained on account of the fact that the petitioner instead of approaching the High Court should have replied to the charges levelled against him.
Learned counsel for the petitioner in reply to the contention of learned Standing Counsel submits that he had in fact submitted his reply on 08.07.2019.
Under such circumstances no interference is warranted in the instant writ petition. The enquiry shall positively be completed within a period of one month from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order, unless there is any legal impediment.
Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 30.7.2019 RPD