Court No. - 18
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1255 of 2019 Petitioner :- Rohit Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Saroj Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhagwan Dutt Pandey,Mrigraj Singh,Shriprakash Mishra
Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.
Heard Sri Saroj Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Amit Manohar, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2, Sri Mrigraj Singh, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 3 and 4 and Sri R.K. Ojha, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shriprakash Mishra, learned counsel for respondent Nos.5 and 6.
The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition challenging the order of suspension dated 5.1.2019 passed by the respondent No.5/6.
It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner is that since several complaints were being made by the petitioner as well as other students of the Institution against the Manager by way of counter blast, the order of suspension has been passed. It is further contended that vide letter dated 1.1.2019 only three days' time was granted to the petitioner to submit his explanation. The aforesaid letter dated 1.1.2019 was received for the first time on 8.1.2019. It is further contended that in the envelope, only some blank papers were kept by the Manager. In the circumstances, the order dated 1.5.2019 is liable to be stayed.
On the other hand, Sri R.K. Ojha, learned Senior Counsel contended that the charges contained in the order of suspension are serious in nature and as such, no interefence could be called for by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is further contended that respondent No.5/6 will conclude the enquiry initiated against the petitioner within three months.
In view of the same and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the present writ petition is disposed of finally with the direction to the respondent No.5/6 to conclude the proceedings initiated against the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
The petitioner is directed to co-operate with the enquiry and not take any unnecessary adjournments .
With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of.
It is made clear that this court is not expressing any opinion on merits of the case and the respondent No.5/6 are being passed orders independently in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 26.2.2019 saqlain