Parashu Ram Singh vs State of U.P.

Hon''ble Anil Kumar, J.—Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned State Counsel.

Initially the petitioner has challenged the orders dated 1.6.2000 and 19.7.2000 passed by U.P. Public Service Tribunal by filing writ petition no. 1517 (S/B) of 2010 (Parashuram Singh Vs. The Secretary of Agriculture U.P. and others), allowed vide order dated 26.2.2008 with following directions:

In the result, the writ petition succeeds and is hereby allowed. The impugned judgment and orders dated 1.6.2000 and 19.7.2000 passed by the State Public Service Tribunal are hereby set aside and a writ in the nature of certiorari is issued quashing the impugned dismissal order dated 26.8.1985 which was served upon the petitioner through letter dated 19.9.1985 with all consequential benefits. Keeping in view the law laid down by Hon''ble the Supreme Court in U.P. Cooperative Federation Ltd. Vs. L.P. Rai (Supra), liberty is granted to the opposite parties to hold a fresh enquiry, in accordance with law. Since the petitioner has already attained the age of superannuation, the opposite parties shall complete the enquiry proceedings within three months from the date a certified copy of this order is produced. The consequential benefits shall be subject to the outcome of the fresh enquiry, if any.

Thereafter in the matter in question, impugned order dated 24.4.2009(Annexure no.1) has been passed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no date, time and place has been fixed for conducting the domestic enquiry and the impugned order has been passed straightaway.

The said fact has been disputed by learned State Counsel on the ground that for oral enquiry date has been fixed on 13.3.2009 but the petitioner himself has not appeared.

The said fact has been disputed by learned counsel for the petitioner.

In view of the above said fact to decide the controversy which involved in the present case, it will be appropriate to go through the record.

Accordingly, learned State Counsel is directed to produce the relevant record on the next date of hearing.

List on 10.1.2012.

It is made clear that this matter shall not be treated as tied up to this Bench.