IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL WRIT PETITION (S/S) NO. 407 of 2011 Upendra Jhiliyal …………..Petitioner. Versus State of Uttarakhand and others ……Respondents. Present: Mr. M.C. Pant, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. N.P. Sah, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand/respondents. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.(Oral) Heard Mr. M.C. Pant, Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. N.P. Sah, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand/respondents. The petitioner by means of this writ petition has challenged the order of his suspension dated 19.4.2011 (Annexure –1 to the writ petition). The petitioner is an employee of “Garhwal Mandal Vikas Nigam”, which is a Government Company. By the impugned order, the petitioner has been suspended and a disciplinary proceeding has been initiated against him. The ground of challenge of the said order is that firstly the order has been passed by the General Manager (Administration), who is not the Appointing Authority and secondly that while passing the suspension order though without giving to the petitioner a formal charge-sheet, Inquiry Officer has been appointed. On these grounds, the impugned order has been challenged. As far as the first contention of the petitioner is concerned, the same does not stand on its legs inasmuch as the impugned order itself states that it has been done by approval of the Managing Director dated 15.4.2011. As far as the second ground of challenge is concerned, 2 the petitioner has also relied upon a decision of the Division Bench of this Court in Attar Singh Rathod Vs. State of Uttarakhand & others, where like in the present writ petition, the impugned order was divided into two, A) by which he was suspended and B) by which even without giving charge-sheet, Inquiry Officer has been appointed and the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court though made no interference on the first part regarding suspension yet interference was made regarding the second part. This writ petition is also dismissed as far as suspension of the petitioner is concerned. All the same, the part of the impugned order whereby Mr. D. Aswal, In charge General Manager (Distribution) has been appointed as Inquiry Officer is only hereby set aside. Writ petition is accordingly disposed of. It is though clarified that “Garhwal Mandal Vikas Nigam” is at liberty to appoint an Inquiry Officer as and when the occasion so arises. No order as to costs. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 6.5.2011 Rathour