V.M.Sahai, S.P.Mehrotra - (1.) -The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, praying for quashing the order dated 7.7.2008 (Annexure-19 to the writ petition) passed by the respondent No. 3, whereby the petitioner has been placed under suspension.
(2.) PURSUANT to our orders dated 21.7.2008, 5.8.2008 and 13.8.2008, various affidavits have been filed on record by both the sides. The matter is being disposed of finally at this stage itself with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents. In our order dated 13.8.2008, we, inter alia, directed as under : "The Appointment Secretary, U. P. Government in his affidavit will also explain as to whether the requirements of the first proviso to sub-rule (1) of Rule 4 of the U. P. Government Servant Rules, 1999 were complied with by making objective consideration before passing the impugned suspension order dated 7.7.2008. The Appointment Secretary, U. P. Government will further state as to what material was before him on the objective consideration of which he exercised his power of suspension, and such material be also filed alongwith his affidavit."
(3.) THE averments in regard to the aforesaid direction are contained in paragraph 5 of the affidavit of the Appointment Secretary-Anoop Chandra Pandey, sworn on 18.8.2008. From the material filed along with the affidavit of the Appointment Secretary-Sri Anoop Chandra Pandey, it is clear that before the Appointment Secretary as well as the Competent Authority only the letter of the District Magistrate dated 30.6.2008, the letter of the District Magistrate dated 28.6.2008 and the reply of the petitioner dated 29.6.2008 and a newspaper cutting were available which were forwarded by Sri S. R. Lakha, Principal Secretary, Nagar Vikas Anubhag-7, U. P., Lucknow with his letter dated 2.7.2008.;