DHARMENDRA SINGH YADAV Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner IS A Block Development Officer and has been suspended by respondent No. 1, the State Government, vide order dated 15.2.2006 , which is Annexure - 1 to the record. He seeks an interim order from this Court staying his suspension till final decision of his writ petition by this Court.

(2.) We have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for all the 4 respondents in this writ petition at the admission stage itself.

(3.) The primary reason for his suspension by the State Government is that he failed to effectively and efficiently perform his duties in planting under the scheme in this regard which was put into operation by the State Government like earlier years. His work rate was found to be 2.37% of the required standard.