AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
6 paragraphs · 144 wordsRavindra Maithani, J
Petitioner has challenged the order of suspension dated 28.08.2021. He has been working as Forest Inspector with the respondents department.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
At the very outset, the Court wanted to know from the learned counsel for the petitioner, as to why should this Court entertain the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, in view of the availability of alternate efficacious remedy from the State Public Services Tribunal, as constituted under the Uttar Pradesh Public Services (Tribunal) Act, 1976 (for short, "the Act 1976).
Learned counsel for the petitioner would seek permission to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to claim before the State Public Services Tribunal as constituted under the Act 1976.
The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty as above.