Allahabad High Court High Court

Shiv Shanker Gupta vs State Of U.P. & Others on 11 January, 2010

Allahabad High Court
Shiv Shanker Gupta vs State Of U.P. & Others on 11 January, 2010
Court No. - 26

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 846 of 2010

Petitioner :- Shiv Shanker Gupta
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Others
Petitioner Counsel :- Pradip Kumar
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.

Hon'ble Shishir Kumar,J.

Heard Sri Pradeep Kumar, learned counsel for petitioner and learned Standing
Counsel for respondents.

The simplicitor writ has been filed by petitioner for a writ of mandamus
commanding respondent No.2 to finalize the enquiry pending against
petitioner without any further delay.

It appears that petitioner on the basis of Government Scheme in the year 2004
was selected for B.T.C. training and he completed the training after
submitting relevant documents of educational qualification i.e. Intermediate
and B.A. On the basis of documents submitted, petitioner was selected and
after completion of training he has been given appointment. It appears that on
the basis of some complaint made by some unknown person, a show cause
notice was given to petitioner showing therein that in the Intermediate marks
disclosed by petitioner, petitioner has obtained 512 marks out of 1000 but he
has disclosed 660 marks out of 1000. Petitioner immediately submitted a
reply but appointment of petitioner has been cancelled. Then petitioner filed
an application/representation to respondent no.2 to make an enquiry from the
relevant authority regarding charges levelled against petitioner. Petitioner
submits that such representation/enquiry is still pending and it has not been
decided and no orders have been passed.

In such circumstances, this writ petition is being disposed of finally directing
respondent No.2 to complete the enquiry against petitioner within a period of
two months and will pass a detailed and reasoned order on the basis of
relevant record. If ultimately it is found that relevant documents submitted by
petitioner was genuine, then petitioner may be considered by relevant
authority for restoration of his appointment as a teacher.

With these observations the writ petition is disposed of.

No order as to costs.

Order Date :- 11.1.2010
SKD