Vivek Chaudhary, J. - (1.) Case is called out in the revised list.
(2.) The counsel for petitioner is present, while Mr. Manoj Singh, learned counsel for the respondents is not present.
(3.) The counsel for petitioner submits that by the impugned order the petitioner has been dismissed from service after holding an inquiry. However, in the inquiry, no oral evidence was taken which was necessarily required to be taken under Rule 7 (vii) of U.P. Government Servant (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1999. The said averment has been specifically made in para-6 of the writ petition to which vague and evasive reply has been given in para-7 of the counter affidavit without there being a specific denial.;