V.S. RAJPUT, S/O. P.L. RAJPUT PRESENTLY POSTED AS JUNIOR ENGINEER Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WHILE the Appellant has been suspended in contemplation of a disciplinary proceeding, at the time of deciding the writ petition filed by him challenging his suspension order, it was brought on record that a charge sheet has been issued and an Inquiry Officer has also been appointed to inquire into the charges. The learned Judge, in the circumstances, did not interfere with either the suspension order or the disciplinary proceedings but at the same time directed that the disciplinary proceedings be completed within four months from the date of charge sheet, i.e. 7th July, 2011. One of the grievances highlighted by the Appellant in the appeal is that the Inquiry Officer appointed to inquire into charges has already expressed an opinion to the effect that the views of the Minister, which resulted in the suspension order and issuance of the charge sheet, can not be ignored despite the preliminary inquiry pointed out no lapse on the part of the Appellant. In the circumstances, it was inappropriate on the part of the disciplinary authority to engage some one who has already dealt with the matter though at the preliminary stage. We, accordingly, interfere with the appointment of the Inquiry Officer and direct that the Inquiry Officer is replaced by the Commissioner, Kumaon Division, who shall act as Inquiry Officer. The Inquiry Officer is directed to conclude the inquiry on or before 12th January, 2012.

(2.) LET a copy of this order be handed to the learned Counsel for the Appellant as well as to the learned Counsel for the State.

(3.) THIS disposes of the appeal.