Manish Mathur - (1.) Heard Ms. Navita Sharma learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned State Counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite parties.
(2.) The present petition has been filed seeking the quashing of the termination order dated 18th September, 1995 with a further prayer for reinstatement of the petitioner on the post of Collection Amin and for regular payment of salary with all consequential benefits. As per the averments of the writ petition, while the petitioner was posted as Collection Amin, he was served with a charge sheet dated 6th March, 1995 containing charges primarily with regard to deficiency in collection work by the petitioner while working in Tehsil Nanpara, District Bahraich. Vide the charge sheet, the Tehsildar, Nanpara was appointed inquiry officer. In pursuance of which a charge sheet dated 6th March, 1995 was issued by the Tehsildar containing only one charge pertaining to lower collection than was prescribed. On receipt of the charge sheet, the petitioner filed his reply on 5th April, 1995 indicating the circumstances under which lower collection of revenue was effected. After inquiry, the Tehsildar submitted his report dated 14th September, 1995 whereupon the impugned termination order dated 18th September, 1995 has been passed.
(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner has primarily submitted that the charge sheet was issued by the Tehsildar whereas the appointing authority of the petitioner was the Sub Divisional Magistrate and therefore the charge sheet was required to be approved by the appointing authority which was not done and therefore the entire inquiry proceedings were vitiated on that account.;