JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Sri Shivam Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Shailendra Kuamr Singh, C.S.C.-III assisted by Sri Shashank Bhasin, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.

2. By means of this petition the petitioner has prayed following relief :

"(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the Charge-sheet dated 18.10.2019, issued by opposite party No. 1, contained in Annexure No.1 to this writ petition.

(ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents not to proceed in furtherance of the Charge-sheet dated 18.10.2019, issued by opposite party No. 1, contained in Annexure No.1 to this writ petition.

(iii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents to forthwith grant all consequential benefits such as release of salary, upon quashing of the Charge-sheet dated 18.10.2019, and completion of formalities towards settlement of the post-retiral dues of the petitioner."

3. Learned Standing Counsel has opposed the prayers made in the writ petition by submitting that the charge-sheet cannot be assailed before the writ Court and the petitioner should participate in the departmental enquiry.

4. On that Sri Shivam Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he is assailing the charge-sheet on the ground that no definite charges have been leveled against the petitioner by means of impugned charge sheet dated 18.10.2019 and the relied upon letter dated 16.10.2018 does not disclose any involvement of the petitioner in the issue in question, if any. As a matter of fact, as per Sri Shivam Sharma it cannot be understood as to which exam the petitioner was allegedly involved in committing irregularities, as to who are the persons who were in collusion with the petitioner and as to when the mass copying for particular examination has been detected and who were involved in mass copying at that point of time. He has also drawn attention of this Court towards charge no. 5 which says that after getting the stay order from the Court the petitioner submitted his joining at the place in contravention of the guidelines of government orders.

5. Sri Shivam Sharma has further drawn attention of this Court towards the order dated 18.12.2019 which was passed on the first date of admission which reads as under :

"Heard learned counsel for the parties.

By means of this petition, the petitioner has assailed the charge sheet on the ground that the charges levelled in the charge sheet are vague and the authority concerned has issued charge sheet just to harass the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the suspension order dated 30.5.2019 was assailed before this Court at Allahabad in Writ-A No.9584 of 2019 and the said writ petition was disposed of on 11.7.2019 directing the opposite parties to expedite the enquiry proceedings and conclude the same within a period of six weeks from 11.7.2019. However, the suspension order was not stayed. The petitioner filed Special Appeal before this Court at Allahabad bearing Special Appeal No.827 of 2019 and the Division Bench of this Court was pleased to admit the said special appeal staying the operation of suspension order dated 30.5.2019 with the further direction that the enguiry against the petitioner may go on and the petitioner shall fully cooperate. It has been clarified in the order dated 28.9.2019 passed by the Division Bench in special appeal that the enquiry may be concluded within the time allowed by the learned Single Judge vide order dated 11.7.2019.

Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that six weeks' period w.e.f. 11.7.2019, the date of order of the Single Judge, has already been expired but the departmental enquiry has not been completed. Sri Shivam Sharma has submitted that what to say about conclusion of departmental enquiry, even the charge sheet has been served upon the petitioner on 20.11.2019 much after expiry of