The petitioner is a Technician grade II and he has come up against the order of transfer as well as suspension.
Sri Saxena contends that the orders have been passed malafidely on account of the reason that the petitioner had made a complaint against S.K.Gupta who is a superior authority of the petitioner and is a Sub Divisional Officer. He contends that an inquiry was set up against him where after he manipulated the petitione's transfer as well as suspension. Sri Saxena further contends that both the orders are liable to be set aside.
I have heard Sri Ranjit Saxena learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Pankaj Kumar Shukla for the respondent Corporation.
The question of transfer of the petitioner does not arise at this stage as the petitioner has also been suspended and has been attached to the office of Executive Engineer, First, Moradabad. So far as the order of suspension is concerned the same recites that there is a possibility that the petitioner has abetted electricity theft but the order further indicates that the Corporation has already suffered loss of revenue and that the petitioner had not diligently discharged his duties. It is therefore evident that the charges are yet to be inquired into.The question as to whether S.K.Gupta had manipulated the orders or not is the defence of the petitioner and therefore the same is to be gone into during the course of enquiry itself.
In this view of the matter this Court cannot usurp the powers of the Inquiry Officer and proceed to examine the allegations and the counter allegations at this stage.
The petitioner may approach the Inquiry Officer who shall proceed to consider the same and shall also endeavor to conclude the inquiry as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of 3 months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order before him.
The writ petition stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 8.1.2010 mna