CANTONMENT BOARD, THROUGH ITS CANTONMENT EXECUTIVE OFFICER SALINI PANDAY Vs. ASHISH RAWAT S/O SRI MADAN SINGH RAWAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri B.S. Adhikari, the learned Counsel for the Appellant and Sri Dinesh Chauhan, the learned Counsel, holding the brief of Sri N.S. Negi, for the Respondent.

(2.) THE present special appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge dated 19.6.2006, whereby three writ petitions were disposed of with certain directions. It transpires that the Respondent -writ Petitioner Ashish Rawat filed writ petition No. 471 (SS) of 2003 questioning the order dated 19.6.2003, by which the subsistence allowance was decreased by 25 per cent. The Petitioner also filed writ petition No. 1343 (SS) of 2004, by which the Petitioner challenged the enquiry report as well as the suspension order. Both the writ petitions were disposed of by the impugned order, whereby the learned Single Judge directed the Appellant to hold a fresh enquiry and further directed that the suspension order would remain in abeyance till the pendency of the enquiry proceeding. The Cantonment Board, being aggrieved by the said order of the learned Single Judge, has filed the present special appeal.

(3.) COMING back to the merits of the case, the learned Single Judge held that the enquiry report cannot be sustained on account of the fact that the complainant was also the Enquiry Officer, who conducted the enquiry against the writ Petitioner and on this short ground, the writ was allowed and a direction was issued by the learned Single Judge to hold a fresh enquiry.