IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (S/B) No. 334 of 2007 Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan …Petitioner. Versus Central Administrative Tribunal, Additional Bench at Allahabad and others. …Respondents. Mr. Gopal Narain, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. M.C. Kandpal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Yogesh Sah, Advocate for respondent no. 2. Coram: Hon’ble J.S. Khehar, C.J. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. J.S. Khehar, C.J, (Oral) 1. Learned counsel for the parties are agreed that the controversy in this case pertaining to the proposition of law involved, namely, whether the inquiry could be conducted by a retired Officer, stands covered in favour of the petitioner in view of the judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in Union of India and others Vs. Alok Kumar (Civil Appeal No. 3369 of 2010, decided on 16.4.2010). 2. In view of the above, the instant petition is allowed. The order rendered by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Additional Bench at Allahabad dated 3.12.2007 (Annexure -1) holding the inquiry proceedings as vitiated on account of the fact the same were conducted by an Officer, who had since retired from service, is hereby set aside. 3. Resultantly, we hold that the inquiry proceeding conducted against respondent no. 2 was valid and in consonance with law. 2 4. Learned counsel representing the rival parties have not raised any other further issue. 5. The instant Writ Petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) (J.S. Khehar, C.J.) 7.6.2010 Rathour