SHAIIESH KUMAR LAL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) V. M. Sahai, J. The petitioner was Lekhpal. He was suspended by Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sakaldiha, Varanasi on 6- 12-1989. He had not participated in the meeting held by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate on 5-12-1989. He was charge-sheeted. The inquiry officer held that the charges were substantialite. Its report was accepted by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate on 30-4-1990 and he dismissed the petitioner from service. The appeal and representation made by the petitioner to Addi tional District Magistrate and Commis sioner, Varanasi Division, Varanasi were dismissed. The correctness of these orders has been challenged in this petition.

(2.) I have heard Shri B. N. Tiwari, the learned Counsel for the petitioner and Shri S. P. Singh, Standing Counsel appear ing for the respondents.

(3.) THERE shall be mo order as to costs. .