Hon’ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.—The writ petition has arisen from the order of suspension dated 23rd July, 2009 (Annexure 5 to the writ petition) and transfer order dated 24th July, 2009 (Annexure 6 to the writ petition).

2. The brief facts relating to the matter giving rise to this writ petition have already been mentioned in my order dated 13th August, 2009. It appears that a scuffle between two persons having political patronage resulted in injuries and loss of property as a result whereof both sought to lodge first information report at the police station Sahajanwa. One of such person, who alongwith his supporters, caused loss to the private property of other one, sought to taken in custody by the Police. The mob mainly consisting of his supporters, Gheraoed Police Station, attacked Police officials and thereafter also caused a road jam on National Highway, which continued for a few hours. The agitation led by local member of Legislative Assembly belong to ruling party.

3. It is alleged that under political pressure petitioner was firstly placed under suspension and thereafter transferred.

4. Considering submissions, this Court passed following order on 13th August, 2009:

“Heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the materials on record.

At the outset Sri Dhurva Narayana, learned counsel for the petitioner prays for and is allowed to make corrections in the narration of respondent No. 5 in the writ petition as well as in the stay application during the course of the day.

Sri Dhruva Narayana assailing the order of suspension submitted that a perusal thereof shows that the Additional Superintendent of Police (Rural) has been directed to conduct a preliminary enquiry and submit his report within five days, meaning thereby that the impugned order of suspension has been made pending even a preliminary enquiry and there is no disciplinary enquiry contemplated or pending as a matter of fact. Therefore, the impugned order is wholly illegal since during the course of preliminary enquiry he could not have been placed under suspension. He further submitted that the transfer order shows that it is transferring the petitioner, who is under suspension, though an employee one suspended, during the course of suspension, he cannot be transferred since he is not holder of a post.

It is also contended that in discharge of the official duties pursuant to the FIR against some political persons, the petitioner went to arrest Ravindra Upadhyay, a Gram Pradhan. A mob gathered near Police Station trying to jam the road and when the petitioner tried to protect the public property, which was being damaged by the said crowd, led by some political party, the higher authorities have chosen to first attach him in the Police Lines and thereafter he has been placed under suspension vide order dated 23rd July 2009 passed by the D.I.G., Gorakhpur and simultaneously he has also been transferred by an order of the same date i.e. 23rd July 2009 of the D.I.G. (Establishment), U.P. from Gorakhpur to Badaun. It is contended that the entire episode is politically motivated and under the influence of respondent Nos. 4 and 5 to victimise the petitioner and to please Ravindra Upadhyay, who is a leader of the present ruling party.

The record shows that a mob gathered near Police Station not only pelted stones on the Police authorities but also damaged some public property and set Government properties on fire and forced closure of the nearby markets. The public also misbehaved with the police authorities and their badges etc., were snatched.

It is really surprising that in broad day light the insurgent mob surrounded the police officers and indulged in arsoning, tearing the uniform of police officers and snatching their badges but no action or even an attempt has been shown by the higher authorities to identify the persons indulged in such activities instead a police officer, who was trying to safe-guard the public and Government property, has been ch