Court No. - 38 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 71672 of 2009 Petitioner :- Kanhaiya Lal Sahu & Another Respondent :- U.P. Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad & Others Petitioner Counsel :- S.S. Chandel Respondent Counsel :- Satish Mandhyan Hon'ble Amreshwar Pratap Sahi,J.
The petitioner no.1 has come up against the order of suspension. It is
submitted that the petitioner no.2 has died and therefore the writ petition
on his behalf stands dismissed.
The contention raised is that the suspension order has been passed by
a higher authority who is not empowered to do so. The second
contention raised is that the recovery if less according to the target
fixed, cannot be a ground for suspension and the judgments of this
Court have been relied upon to advance the aforesaid submission. The
said judgments are on record as Annexure 1 and 4 to the writ petition
respectively.
Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that in view of the aforesaid
position the impugned order of suspension is liable to be set aside.
I have perused the suspension order as also the judgments which have
been relied upon.The impugned order states that the petitioner is being
suspended on the ground that he has facilitated evasion of tax/mandi
fee and the recovery of the petitioner is less then target fixed. The
decisions which have been relied upon by the petitioner and have been
appended along with the writ petition have not dealt with the issue of
facilitating evasion of tax. There is no other ground for interference with
the impugned order.The suspension order has been passed by a
superior authority and therefore the said ground is also not available to
the petitioner.
The writ petition lacks merit and it is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 4.1.2010
mna