HARI OM RASTOGI Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by the writ petitioner, who met with partial success before the learned Single Judge. He wants this Court to allow the writ petition in toto, modifying the judgment of the learned Judge.

(2.) The petitioner-appellant was a Consolidation Officer. On 9/11/2006, while posted at Agra, he was served with a charge sheet in relation to certain judicial orders that he had made in the year 2003 at Farrukhabad. The learned Single Judge has quoted the charges in the judgment impugned, but it would be pertinent to reproduce some more details and particulars carried in the charge sheet dtd. 9/11/2006, besides just the content of the charges. Charges Nos.1 and 2, as set out in the charge sheet, together with the reference to evidence, by which these were sought to be established, are extracted below:

(3.) It is the petitioner-appellant's case that after service of the charge sheet, he was neither provided documents that he demanded nor any oral evidence recorded on behalf of the establishment by examining witnesses. The petitioner-appellant too was not examined and the inquiry report was submitted ex parte on 9/8/2007 by the Inquiry Officer, the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Etawah to the Disciplinary Authority, the Consolidation Commissioner, U.P., Lucknow.