AJEET KUMAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Jagannath Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel.

(2.) BY means of the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 2nd August, 2006, passed by the respondent No. 2 by which the services of the petitioner has been terminated.

(3.) LEARNED standing counsel submitted that present is the case where on an enquiry, it was found that the petitioner was involved in 22 criminal cases, therefore, it is not the case where termination order has been passed without making any enquiry. He submitted that the petitioner has not disputed about the criminal cases lodged against him included in the impugned order. He further submitted that the petitioner has statutory alternative remedy by way of appeal under Rule 11 of the U. P. Government Servant (Dispute and Appeal) Rules, 1999 which the petitioner has not availed and, therefore, on the facts and circumstances, the petitioner is not entitled for any relief from this Court.