KAILASH NATH PANDEY Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) K. C. Bhargava, J. By means of this petition, the petitioner has challenged the order of dismissal dated 24-11-1988.

(2.) THE facts of the case in brief are that the petitioner was appointed as Lekhpal on 3-1-1971. THEreafter he was placed under suspension on 24-12-1s87 and charge-sheet was issued to him. THE petitioner submitted reply to the charge-sheet on 12-7-1988. It is alleged that the Inquiry Officer did not follow the principles of natural justice while conducting the Inquiry. In all five charges were levelled against the petitioner. THE petitioner was not allowed any opportunity during the course of inquiry to produce wit nessed and documentary evidence.

(3.) THE record of the Court shows that counter-affidavit is not on record, even though it was stated by the learned Standing Counsel that the counter-affidavit has been filed. THE Court directed the State counsel to file the counter-affidavit, but no counter-affidavit is on record. THErefore, a copy of the counter-affidavit was taken from the learned State counsel and arguments were concluded.