R.A.Sharma, J. - (1.) The petitioner, who is a Government servant, belonging to the Provincial Civil Service, was served with a charge sheet dated December 10, 1992, in response to which he submitted his reply denying the charges. The Commissioner, Bareilly Division, Bareilly was appointed as Inquiry Officer, who submitted his report dated March 3, 1994, holding the petitioner guilty of charges. Acting on the report of the Inquiry Officer the Government passed an order dated April 24, 1996, dismissing the petitioner from service. Being aggrieved by the said order he has filed this writ petition.
(2.) Counter affidavits have been filed on behalf of the Government as well as the Commissioner, Bareilly Division, Bareilly, who was appointed as Inquiry Officer. The petitioner has filed rejoinder affidavit in reply thereto. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing counsel.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has made two submissions in support of the writ petition, namely, (i) no inquiry was held by the Inquiry Officer before submitting his report to the Government, (ii) no reasonable opportunity of being heard was given to the petitioner. In his support the learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on Article 311 (2) of the Constitution of India as well as on Rule 55 of the U. P. Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1930 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules).;