of U.P Vs. Ravinder Nath Chaturvedi & Anr
 INSC 432 (28 August 1995)
K. Ramaswamy, K. Hansaria B.L. (J)
JT 1995 (6) 614 1995 SCALE (5)86
O R D
learned counsel for the parties.
high Court has set aside the imposition of the penalty on the respondents on
the ground that no reasonable opportunity was given to the respondents during
the inquiry by the Inquiry Officer. It is also found that no one was examined
to prove the case of the State. It would be desirable that an officer who is
acquainted with the records may also be examined to prove the documentary
evidence and opportunity may be given to the respondents to cross-examine the
witness or produce any evidence in rebuttal. Thereafter, inquiry will be
conducted, the report will be given and copy thereof will be supplied to the
order of the High Court in accordingly set aside.
Inquiry Officer, if he is still in service is directed to conduct and complete
the inquiry within a period of four months from the date of receipt of this
Order. If he is not in service, the State is directed to appoint another
Inquiry Officer afresh who would do the needful within the said period.
case of fresh appointment of Inquiry Officer, the State Government is directed
to appoint an Inquiry Officer within one month from the date of receipt of this
submission of the report by the Inquiry Officer, the State Government is
further directed to consider the inquiry report and take appropriate decision
within three months thereafter.
appeal is accordingly allowed with the above directions. No costs.