Hon'ble P.K.S. Baghel, J.—The writ jurisdiction of this Court under Ar ticle 226 of the Constitution of India is invoked against the order dated 6.8.2015 passed by the District Magistrate whereby he has dismissed the petition from service of Lekhpal and the order passed by the Commissioner dated 30.4.2016 whereby he has dismissed his appeal.

2. A brief reference to factual aspect would suffice. The petitioner was initially appointed as Lekhpal and later on he earned his promotion to the post of Registrar Kanoongo. While he was working in Tehsil Dibai District Bulandshahr, he was served upon a charge-sheet dated 25.11.2014 containing the sole charge that while he was functioning as a Lekhpal at Tehsil Siana in the year 2002, he had submitted an incorrect report relating to a sale-deed on the basis which Tehsildar passed an order to record name of the vendee in the revenue papers. To be more specific, one Ikramul Haq had executed a registered sale-deed dated 28.8.2002 in favour of his wife Smt. Noorjahan. Tehsildar asked the petitioner to submit the report in respect of the said sale-deed. The Tehsildar passed the order for mutation based upon the petitioner, which was found to be incorrect.

3. The petitioner was granted 15 days time to submit his reply. Before submitting his reply, he submitted an application dated 8.12.2014 before the Enquiry Officer requesting him to provide him some documents, which are necessary to submit effective reply to the charge-sheet. It is submitted that his request was declined by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Siana who communicated the petitioner, vide communication dated 29.12.2014 addressed to the Enquiry Officer that the documents required by the petitioner are not available as they have been sent to Board of Revenue, Lucknow in respect of a enquiry. The petitioner again moved an application on 2.1.2015 to provide some other documents relating to the enquiry. The said application was also rejected by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Siana, vide communication dated 8.1.2015, on the ground that document sought by the petitioner were not relevant for the enquiry proceedings.

4. It is averred by the petitioner that under such circumstances, he had no other option but to submit reply though documents which were relevant for giving effective reply, were not furnished to him. The Enquiry Officer submitted a report dated 3.3.2015 wherein he held the petitioner guilty of charge levelled against him. The Enquiry Officer found that the petitioner had submitted an incorrect report dated 28.8.2002 with regard to ownership of Ikramul Haq as a result of which the name of vendee Smt. Noorjahan was recorded in the revenue record pursuant to the sale-deed dated 8.8.2002.

5. The disciplinary authority on the basis of the enquiry report issued a show-cause notice dated 19.3.2015 to petitioner calling upon him to submit his reply.

6. The petitioner challenged the said show-cause notice dated 19.3.2015 by filing Writ-A No. 17442 of 2015 which was dismissed by this Court on 3.4.2015. It is averred in the writ petition that later on a notice was also issued on 16.4.2015 to the petitioner by the Revenue Record Officer asking him to be present on 22.4.2015 for personal hearing in the office of District Magistrate. It is stated that the petitioner went to the office of the District Magistrate on 22.4.2015 but he was not given personal hearing by the District Magistrate. By another letter dated 5.5.2015, he was called to appear on 7.4.2015 (sic) in the office of the District Magistrate. It is stated that on the said date also, the petitioner was not heard by any official. Whereafter, he submitted his reply on 6.4.2015 to the show-cause notice dated 19.3.2015. On 6.8.2015 the District Magistrate, Bulandshahr passed an order dismissing the petitioner from service. Aggrieved by the order of the District Magistrate, the petitioner preferred an appeal which was also dismissed.

7. It is stated in the writ petition that d