Hon’ble Anil Kumar, J.—Heard Sri A.P. Singh, learned counsel for petitioner, Sri Vikrant Raghuvanshi, learned State counsel and perused the record.

2. Petitioner who was working on the post of Stenographer and posted under Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Tarabganj placed under suspension by order dated 3.12.2009 pending disciplinary proceedings.

3. A charge-sheet has been issued to the petitioner on 27.12.2009, served on him through Tehsildar, Sadar, after receiving the same he sought time by letter dated 15.2.2010 from the Inquiry Officer to submit reply to the charges leveled.

4. On 17.2.2010, he wrote a letter to the Inquiry Officer demanding certain documents, after receiving the said letter the Inquiry Officer on 23.2.2010 has given the documents as demanded by the petitioner. Again on n 5.3.2010, petitioner wrote a letter demanding certain other documents in response to which the Inquiry Officer has written letter dated 8.3.2010. But, the petitioner not participated in the inquiry proceedings, filed a Writ Petition No. 295 (SS) of 2010, disposed of by order 22.1.2010, relevant portion quoted as under :

“Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, it is provided that in case, the petitioner requires the copies of any document and makes an application in that behalf, the Enquiry Officer shall consider the application of the petitioner for supply of documents and after being satisfied about the relevancy of such documents within three days from the receipt of such application, he shall supply the copies of such documents to the petitioner and in case it is not practically possible or for any other valid reason to supply the copy of any such document, he may allow inspection of such document to the petitioner by fixing date, time and place for such inspection within next seven days. The Enquiry Officer shall ensure free access to the petitioner to such documents, which are to be inspected by the petitioner. The petitioner shall thereafter submit reply to the charge-sheet within the next fifteen days and the Enquiry Officer shall complete the enquiry within the next two months from the date of submission of the reply. The Enquiry Officer shall submit his report on or before the expiry of the aforesaid period of two months to the disciplinary/appointing authority, who shall take necessary steps and pass final orders within the next one month. In case the petitioner seeks any adjournment, the period of such adjournment shall be excluded from the time schedule referred to above. The petitioner shall co-operate in the enquiry, failing which, it will be open to the enquiry officer to conclude the enquiry ex parte within the period provided hereinabove.

In case the enquiry is not completed within the time provided, despite the co-operation of the petitioner, the order of suspension shall stand revoked and the petitioner would be at liberty to approach the Court again.

With the above directions, the writ petition is finally disposed of."

5. After passing of the said judgment, the Inquiry Officer has wrote a letter to the petitioner to inspect the documents as sought by him and submit his reply positively by 30.3.2010, which was received by the petitioner on 27.3.2010. After receiving the same, he submitted reply to the charge-sheet on 31.3.2010.

6. However, on 11.3.2010, the petitioner wrote a letter to the competent authority for change of Inquiry Officer/Chief Revenue Officer, Gonda. The said request made by the petitioner has been accepted and City Magistrate, Gonda was appointed as Inquiry Officer.

7. The newly appointed Inquiry Officer on 27.4.2010 given opportunity to the petitioner to cross-examine the witnesses, produced by the department in support of the charges levelled on him, thereafter on 11.5.2010 the petitioner was allowed to cross-examine Sri Nand Kumar Tiwari, Lekhpal/Prabhari Tehsil, Tarabganj, on 17.5.201, Sri Kalka Prasad, Tehsildar, Gonda, on 30.4.2010, Sri Indresh Kumar,SDM, Tarabganj, on 3