In a writ petition challenging a suspension order passed in contemplation of a disciplinary enquiry, the Court found no infirmity and dismissed the petition as no interim order existed in the record.
Writ petition dismissed; no interim order passed by this court.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 28
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 50370 of 2008
Petitioner :- Brijendra Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Others Counsel for Petitioner :- L.P. Singh,Samir Garg Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,A.K. Pandey
Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.
The matter has been called out in the revised list. None appears on behalf of the petitioner to press this writ petition though names of counsel for the petitioner are shown in the cause list. Learned Standing Counsel for the State and Sri G.D. Mishra, learned counsel for the respondent no.2 are present.
The writ petition is directed against the order of suspension dated 27.8.2008 passed by respondents no.2. The suspension has been made in contemplation of a disciplinary enquiry.
Learned Standing Counsel points out that the charges as disclosed in the order of suspension is grave enough to warrant a dismissal from service in case charge stands approved.
The order sheet reveals that there is no interim order passed by this court. The petitioner has not brought any subsequent development in the record. There is no infirmity in the order of suspension.
The writ petition is dismissed.
Order Date :- 29.8.2018 Pramod
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the order of suspension against the petitioner barring attendance is sustainable in law and fact.
Brijendra Singh
State Of U.P.
Others
Ajay Bhanot
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
