KESHAV PRASAD DUBEY Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Preet Pal Singh Rathore, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Mata Prasad, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State-respondents.

(2.) The present petition has been filed seeking to raise a challenge to the order dated 24.11.2019 passed by the fourth respondent in terms of which the petitioner has been placed under suspension pending initiation of departmental proceedings.

(3.) The principal contention sought to be raised is that the appointing authority of the petitioner, who is presently working on the post of Inspector, is the Deputy Inspector General of Police and in view thereof the authority competent to pass the order of suspension would be the appointing authority i.e. the Deputy Inspector General of Police and not the Superintendent of Police who has passed the order impugned. Reliance is sought to be placed upon Rule 17(1)(a) of The Uttar Pradesh Police Officers of the Subordinate Ranks (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991 (in short 'the Rules, 1991') in support of the aforesaid contention.