JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Sri Jai Narayan Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. List revised. None appears for the opposite parties, nor any request for adjournment has been made.

3. On 08.03.2021 this Court directed learned counsel for the petitioner to intimate the learned counsel for the opposite parties about the date fixed, as the date was fixed for 10.03.2021.

4. Sri Pandey has shown a letter whereby he has intimated about the date fixed through e-mail.

5. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the suspension order 04.01.2020 passed by the Managing Director, U.P. Cooperative Federation Limited, Lucknow. The reason/ground of suspension is that the petitioner was transferred to District Office, Mau on 21.11.2019, but he has not submitted his joining at the transferred place. Therefore, pending departmental inquiry, he was placed under suspension. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention of this Court towards Annexure-3, which is an order dated 09.01.2020 passed by the District Manager, P.C.F., Jhansi, relieving the petitioner from Jhansi.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that when the petitioner was relieved from Jhansi on 09.01.2020, how could he submit his joining at Mau, pursuant to the transfer order dated 21.11.2019. Therefore, the reason so indicated in the suspension order is mis-concieved and the Managing Director has passed the suspension order without verifying the fact from Jhansi, as to whether the petitioner has been relieved from Jhansi or not.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that after the suspension order dated 04.01.2020 being passed, the petitioner preferred representations to the Managing Director, which have been enclosed with the writ petition, apprising that he has not committed any misconduct. As non-submitting his joining at transferred place was not a deliberate and intentional conduct of the petitioner, but the competent authority at Jhansi has not relieved the petitioner till 09.01.2020 and before his relieving from Jhansi, the suspension order dated 04.01.2020 has been passed, therefore, he has requested that suspension order may be withdrawn.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that more than 14 months period have passed since order of suspension dated 04.01.2020, but neither the charge-sheet has been served upon the petitioner nor any inquiry has been conducted. He has further submitted that after the suspension of the petitioner, he has not been paid subsistence allowance till date. He has lastly submitted that he is ready to submit his joining at the transferred place and the opposite parties may be directed to accept the joining of the petitioner at transferred place at District Office, P.C.F., Mau.

9. Be that as it may, since the counsel for the opposite party Nos. 2, 3 and 4 is not present to dispute the contention of the petitioner and despite the list having been revised, no request for adjournment has been made, therefore, the contention and submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner are treated to be correct. Besides, the records of the writ petition are also supporting the contention of the petitioner, inasmuch as the suspension order has been passed on 04.01.2020 prior to the relieving order dated 09.01.2020, whereby the petitioner has been relieved from Jhansi. Therefore, it appears that the suspension order has been passed without verifying the fact and reason for not submitting the joining at transferred place by the petitioner. Not only the above, when the petitioner has preferred his representation dated 22.01.2020 (Annexure 4 to the writ petition) to the General Manager and representation dated 05.02.2020 (Annexure 5 to the writ petition) preferred to the Managing Director, the competent authority must have verified the very fact as to whether the petitioner has committed any misconduct or not, inasmuch as not submitting joining at the transferred place for the reason that he was not