Rakesh Kumar Singh vs State Of U.P.

Hon''ble Anil Kumar, J.—Heard learned counsel for parties and perused the record. By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order of suspension dated 27.12.2010 (Annexure No.1) passed by opposite party no.2 i.e. Commissioner Food and Drugs Administration Department U. P., Lucknow.

Learned counsel for the petitioner while assailing the impugned order submits that initially the petitioner has been transferred from Lucknow to Gorakhpur. Aggrieved by the said facts, for redressal of his grievances, approached this Court by filing writ petition no.5794 (SS) of 2010 (Rakesh Kumar Singh vs. State of U.P.), on 25.8.2010 an interim order was passed, the relevant portion reads as under:

Considering the aforesaid facts, operation of the orders dated 12.8.2010 and 20.7.2010, contained in Annexure Nos.1 and 2 to the writ petition, shall remain stayed.

He further submits that thereafter State challenged the said order before this Court by filing Special Appeal No. 746 of 2010 (State of U.P. vs. Rakesh Kumar Singh), on 22.10.2010 an order was passed ( a copy annexed as annexure No.5 to the writ petition), the relevant portion reads as under:

In view of the above, the impugned order is set aside. The appeal is allowed. The matter is remanded back to the learned Single Judge for reconsideration. There shall be a status quo for fifteen days.

It is further submitted on behalf of the petitioner that thereafter an application for correction of the said order has been moved by the State as well as application for modification of the said order has been moved by the petitioner, are still pending.

Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that the petitioner has filed a contempt petition bearing Contempt No.3088 of 2010, on 22.12.2010 an order was passed, is reproduced hereinunder:

Issue notice to the opposite party to show cause through counsel why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against him for non-compliance of the order passed by Writ Court in the instant case.

Accordingly, it is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that, the impugned order of suspension dated 27.12.2010 (Annexure No.1) passed by opposite party no.2 is malicious and by way of punishment, till date neither any charge-sheet has been given nor any allowance has been paid.

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through records, further operation and implementation of impugned order of suspension dated 27.12.2010 passed by opposite party no.2 shall remain stayed. However, it is clarified that opposite parties may proceed for disciplinary enquiry in accordance with law.