S.K.Mookerji, J. - (1.) I have heard learned counsel for the-petitioner and also learned Standing Counsel.
(2.) This case can be disposed of at the stage of admission itself.
(3.) By this writ petition, the validity of the older dated 21.8.1990 passed by the respondent No. 2 has been questioned. By the impugned order, the petitioner has been suspended. By the same order, Tahsildar has been made in Enquiry Officer and he has also been directed to prepare copies of the charge-sheet, which should be sent to the respondent No. 2 within 15 days so that necessary approval may be taken for commencing enquiry. Learned counsel has submitted three points which are as under: (i) That Tahsildar and respondent No. 2 had inspected the site together and, therefore, an enquiry by the Tahsildar will be meaningless. (ii) That the respondent No. 2 in his impugned order has almost recorded a finding against the petitioner, and, therefore, a subordinate officer like Tahsildar, shall not be able to do fair justice to the petitioner. (iii) Then even if, the contents (Annexure '2' to the writ petition) are taken as a preliminary enquiry, the observations made therein shall normally prejudice the petitioner, but in fact, there is neither any enquiry pending nor any enquiry contemplated against the petitioner.;