IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (SS) No. 568 of 2025 Shiv Kumar Saini. ………………… Petitioner.

Versus State of Uttarakhand and others. ……………Respondents.

Present:

Ms. Indu Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner.

Mr. Ganesh Kandpal, learned Deputy Advocate General with Mr. Pradeep Hairiya, learned Standing Counsel for the State.

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Thapliyal, J.

1. By the instant writ petition, petitioner, who was inducted in service as an Assistant Teacher in Primary Institution in 2009, is aggrieved by the office memo. dated 05.11.2024 issued by District Education Officer, Elementary Education, Chamoli whereby petitioner has been dismissed from service. Before dismissing the petitioner from service, petitioner was placed under suspension on 11.09.2024 on the charge that at the time of induction in service he submitted the mark-sheet of intermediate and on comparing the same with the gazette notification, there is difference in the marks.

2. The main contention of the petitioner is that after placing petitioner under suspension, no charge-sheet was ever been given to the petitioner and not only this, even no Inquiry officer was appointed and only by way of