Ashok Kumar Srivastava vs State Of U.P. Thru Ecy. ...
2013 Latest Caselaw 776 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 23
 

 
Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 71 of 2008
 

 
Petitioner :- Ashok Kumar Srivastava
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Ecy. Cooperative & 3 Ors.
 
Petitioner Counsel :- H.K. Bhatt,R.K.S. Suryvanshi
 
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,N.N.Jaiswal,Vinod Kumar Singh
 

 
Hon'ble Pankaj Mithal,J.

The argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that one Sudhir Kumar, Regional Manager, Faizabad Division was the complainant and he himself was appointed as the enquiry officer which is in clear violation of Regulation 85 (iv) of the U.P. Co-operative Societies Employees Services Regulations, 1975.

The record of the writ petition do demonstrates that Sudhir Kumar Regional Manager,Faizabad Division had submitted the charge sheet upon the petitioner as an enquiry officer but it is not clear as to whether he was the person who made the complaint on which the enuqiry was instituted against him.

Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to file a supplementary affidavit specifically making the averments to the above effect supported by necessary documents to show that Sudhir Kumar was the complainant.

He may do so within a week.

List in the next cause list.

Order Date :- 11.4.2013

SKS