C. CHANNAPPA Vs. HOPCOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AN order of suspension, as at Annexure -A, passed by the respondent against the petitioner has been assailed in this writ petition.

(2.) SRI Gangadharaiah, learned advocate for the petitioner contended that the impugned order is arbitrary and illegal, since, no opportunity to rebut the allegations was provided and that there is violation of principles of natural justice. He submitted that the petitioner has been kept under suspension with malafide intention and hence interference is warranted.

(3.) IN contemplation of holding a domestic enquiry into the allegations appearing against the petitioner, he has been kept under suspension by issuing the order dated 18.01.2014, as at Annexure -A. Suspension allowance has been ordered to be paid to the petitioner.