PRAMOD KUMAR BARUA Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WITH the consent of parties, matter is finally heard. Petitioner has challenged the suspension order dated 16.7.2012 (Annexure P -1) in this petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner has raised two fold contentions to assail this order - (i) The allegations mentioned in the suspension order are incorrect and not sustainable, and (ii) the petitioner is suspended in a malicious manner because vide Annexure P -12 dated 14.7.2012 somebody else has been transferred in place of the petitioner and to accommodate him petitioner is placed under suspension. He submits that suspension order is malafide in nature.

(2.) By drawing attention of this Court on various documents learned counsel for the petitioner submits that suspension is totally uncalled for and unwarranted and if those documents are perused minutely, no case or allegation can sustain which is mentioned in the suspension order.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the respondents, per contra, supported the order, Annexure P -1.