NABI JAN QURESHI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Counter affidavit has already been filed in this case by the respondents.

(2.) Heard Sri Anoop Trivedi for the petitioner and teamed Standing Counsel for the respondents. Sri Trivedi does not propose to file any rejoinder affidavit. As requested and agreed by the learned counsel for the parties this Court proceeds to hear and decide the matter finally under the Rules of the Court.

(3.) The present writ petition has been filed challenging the order of suspension dated 30.6.2005 passed by respondent No. 2, the Director, Local Bodies, U.P., Lucknow placing the petitioner under suspension. It appears that the petitioner was working as Executive Officer, Nagarpalika Parishad Puranpur, Pilibhit at the relevant time when the impugned order of suspension was passed. There was a visit by Commissioner, Bareilly Division of the aforesaid Nagarpalika Parishad wherein he found mismanagement regarding supply of drinking water, cleaning, sewer and drainage arrangements for which he held the Executive Officer, i.e., the petitioner prima facie responsible and sent his report to the Government pursuant whereto a letter dated 27.6.2005 issued by the State Government directing respondent No. 2 to place petitioner under suspension and hold departmental inquiry against him. Pursuant thereto respondent No. 2 has passed the impugned order.