CWP No.907 of 2011. 08.08.2011 Present: Mr. M.C. Verma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Bhupender Gupta, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Neeraj Gupta, Advocate, for respondent No.1. Mr. A.K. Bansal, Addl. Advocate General & Mr. P.M. Negi, Dy. Advocate General, for respondent No.3. The petitioner is facing domestic enquiry. He stands duly charge-sheeted and the Inquiry Officer has been appointed. The petitioner represented to the Inquiry Officer for the appointment of the defence assistant of his choice, but he was denied. Learned Senior Advocate duly assistant by Shri Neeraj Gupta, on the instructions received from respondent No.1 states at Bar that keeping in view the nature of charges, the petitioner may be allowed to be represented by the defence assistant of his choice, but it may not be taken as a precedent for other cases. The learned counsel for the petitioner agrees to it. ORDER In view of above stated position, it is ordered that the petitioner shall be allowed to be defended in the domestic enquiry pending against him, by a defence assistant of his choice, but it shall not be cited as a precedent for other cases. The petitioner is also at liberty to represent to the competent authority of his Department for -2- the release of provisional pension within a period of one month from today and the respondent shall take appropriate decision on his representation within one month thereafter. The petition stands disposed of in the above terms and so also the pending application(s), if any. Copy DASTI on usual terms. August 08, 2011. (Surinder Singh), J. (rc)