RAVINDRA MAITHANI
Subham Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State Of Uttarakhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral). - Facts necessary for considering the instant writ petition, briefly stated, are as follows:-
Petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher L.T. Grade in the year 2016. Subsequent to it, an inquiry was conducted with regard to the permanent resident certificate submitted the petitioner and the Tehsildar concerned submitted his report on 21.06.2018 to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate concerned. The inquiry report reflected that the petitioner obtained permanent resident certificate by misrepresentation. Petitioner was issued a notice to which he replied on 03.12.2020 alongwith several documentary evidence. Petitioner was not aware of the inquiry report dated 21.06.2018 submitted by the Tehsildar. Despite that on 08.03.2021, the respondent no.4 Committee of Management placed the petitioner under suspension and appointed Inquiry Officer/Inquiry Committee and this suspension order was further approved on 12.03.2021 by respondent no.3. Both the orders are impugned.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the suspension order is bad in the eyes of law because in view of Sectio
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.