Uttarakhand High Court

Vinay Sharma vs Union Of India And Others on 6 May, 2025

                                                              2025:UHC:3506-DB


      HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
     HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. G. NARENDAR
                         AND
          HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK MAHRA
                   06th MAY, 2025

            WRIT PETITION (SB)NO. 130 OF 2025
Vinay Sharma                                             ......Petitioner


                                      Versus


Union of India and others.                          .......Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner        :      Dr. Kartikey Hari Gupta, Ms. Pallavi
                                         Bahuguna, Ms. Irum Zeba and Mr.
                                         Rafat Munir, learned counsel.
Counsel for the Union of India    :      Mr. Manoj Kumar, learned Standing
                                         Counsel.
Counsel for    the   Respondent   :      Mr. J.S. Bisht and Mr. Digvijay Nath
Nos.2 and 3                              Dubey, learned counsel.


JUDGMENT :

(per Mr. Alok Mahra, J.)

By means of the present writ petition, the

petitioner is challenging the order dated 22.04.2025

(Annexure-1), whereby a charge-sheet has been issued to

the petitioner for imposing major penalty as per the

relevant rules.

2. The grounds to challenge the impugned charge-

sheet, canvassed by the petitioner, are that he is being

continuously harassed by the respondent-Institute and

earlier, he was issued a show cause notice and along with

it, he was put under suspension, which he challenged by

preferring Writ Petition (S/B) No. 549 of 2024 'Vinay

Sharma vs. Sandeep Singh and another' before this Court,

2025:UHC:3506-DB

and this Hon'ble Court, vide its order dated 03.09.2024,

stayed the suspension of the petitioner.

3. The petitioner contends that the respondents had

refused to relieve him for joining on the post of Registrar on

deputation in A.I.I.M.S., Rajkot and only after this Hon'ble

Court directed the respondents to relieve the petitioner,

they issued a wrong relieving order, due to which, he was

not taken on deputation thereafter.

4. Now by means of the present writ petition, the

petitioner has challenged the charge-sheet dated

22.04.2025 (Annexure-1).

5. We have heard the learned counsel for the

petitioner and have perused the impugned charge-sheet,

and in our considered opinion, the same is specific and

there appears no ambiguity therein.

6. Keeping in view that the charges leveled against

the petitioner are clear and there is no ambiguity in the

charge-sheet, this Court is of the considered view that the

impugned charge-sheet does not require any interference

by this Court.

5. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.

2025:UHC:3506-DB

6. No order as to costs.

7. Pending application, if any, also stands dismissed

accordingly.

________________

G. NARENDAR, C.J.

_____________ ALOK MAHRA, J.

Dt: 06th May, 2025 Rathour

PRAVIND

RA SINGH 2.5.4.20=23699ccc2fd40ad81b6fd13323779 d9e3aeb1097d17dbb53d481cabd25946ee d, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=1F65499E931DF71CDAF92A

RATHOUR 40CC6179B8E010331BA695239171F906FD 5C45C4E8, cn=PRAVINDRA SINGH RATHOUR Date: 2025.05.13 11:17:00 +05'30'