RAM GOPAL SHUKLA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Pursuant to the order of the Court, the original record has been placed for its perusal.

(2.) The petitioner is a clerk in the office of the Superintendent of Police and, by the impugned order, 15 days salary has been deducted for dereliction of duty and for non-compliance of the order of the High Court and in not placing the appropriate file before the authority concerned.

(3.) The facts leading to the filing of the writ petition is, that one Shambhu Yadav questioned his suspension order by filing Writ Petition No.30050 of 2008 in which an interim order dated 4.7.2008 was passed staying the suspension order till the next date of listing. This suspension order was received in the office of the Superintendent of Police Mau, U.P. from the office of the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Azamgarh Range on 17.7.2008. The petitioner, who is a clerk, contends that he had placed the order of the High Court along with an office note before the Superintendent of Police Mau on 23.7.2008. The record indicates that no order was passed on this note. But at the same time the Court finds that a letter was issued from the office of the Superintendent of Police on 2.8.2008 seeking an opinion from the Chief Standing Counsel. The record also indicates that the file was again placed along with an office note on 26.8.2008, on which date, the Superintendent of Police issued an order seeking an opinion from the D.G.C. The record also indicates that the opinion of the D.G.C. was placed on the file on 4.9.2008 and thereafter another note dated 25.9.2008 was prepared by the petitioner. On these notes, no order has been passed by the Superintendent of Police and it is not clear as to whether the aforesaid notes was placed by the petitioner before the Superintendent of Police concerned. However, the record indicates that another letter dated 18.9.2008 was written by the Superintendent of Police to the Chief Standing Counsel requesting for issuance of another certified copy of the order of the High Court dated 4.7.2008 to enable the Superintendent of Police to comply with the order of the Court.