Court No. - 29 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 46896 of 2010 Petitioner :- Sudhanshu Sharma Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others Petitioner Counsel :- Swarn Kr. Srivastava,Anil Kr. Srivastava Respondent Counsel :- C. S. C. Hon'ble Sheo Kumar Singh,J.
Hon’ble Devendra Kumar Arora,J.
Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to implead the
authority as respondent and serve a copy of the writ petition
on the counsel appearing for the Authority.
Argument is that once departmental enquiry is concluded in
petitioner’s favour and nothing wrong was found then no
vigilance can be directed and otherwise also if something
can be put to the motion then there has to be strong reason
and not only just suspicion and thus argument is that entire
exercise is without any material and just on the whims of the
respondents.
Sri Pradhan, learned Standing Counsel who has attended
the matter is directed to seek instructions from the
respondents as to what material and on what basis fresh
vigilance enquiry has been directed and the justification for
the same has to be placed before the court on or before the
date fixed.
If so required Sri Pradhan may file short affidavit annexing
the material also.
As prayed, put up this matter as fresh on 16.8.2010.
Order Date :- 9.8.2010
Sachdeva