BALRAM GUPTA Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Dharmendra Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State.

(2.) Petitioner who has been working as a Tehsildar, Tehsil Jalaun, District Jalaun, is aggrieved by some departmental preliminary fact finding report submitted on 3/2/2023 on the complaint made by the Tehsil Bar Association.

(3.) It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that in view of the bar createdd under Sec. 225 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, no such enquiry was tenable in the matter of conduct of the petitioner in discharge of official duty. It is further submitted that this internal departmental enquiry may be a preliminary fact finding enquiry which has been forwarded to the Board of Revenue upon which he apprehends that the competent authority may set into motion a regular departmental enquiry. Learned counsel in order to advance his argument has relied upon a number of judgments by the Supreme Court as Zunjarrao Bhikaji Nagarkar versus Union of India and others: 1999 VII Supreme Court Cases 409, (2007) 4 SCC 247:Ramesh Chandra Singh versus High Court of Allahabad and another and recent judgment by a division Bench of this Court passed in Special Appeal Defective No.40 of 2023, Anjali Chaurasia versus State of U.P. and others.