HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL Writ Petition no. 1150(S/S) 2006 Ramesh Das S/o Late Sri Galthu Das, Resident of 2/F/5 Roshnabad Collectorate Colony, Presently working as Clerk (Ahalamad), In Special Land Acquisition Office Roshnabad, Haridwar. -- Petitioner. Versus 1. State of Uttaranchal, through Secretary Revenue, Dehradun, 2. District Magistrate, Haridwar, --Respondents. Sri Tanuj Semwal, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Harendra Belwal, learned Standing Counsel for the State of Uttaranchal. Hon’ble M.M. Ghildiyal, J. Heard Sri Tanuj Semwal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Harendra Belwal, learned Standing Counsel for the State of Uttaranchal/respondents. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 7th August 2006 passed by the District Magistrate, Haridwar by which the petitioner, who is working as Clerk (Ahalamad) in the office of Special land Acquisition Office, Haridwar was put under suspension for certain charges. Sri Uttam Singh Chauhan, Tehsildar, Haridwar has been appointed as Inquiry Officer to inquire into the matter against the petitioner. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner was earlier suspended on 18.11.2004 for the identical charges, however the said suspension order was lateron revoked, after holding inquiry and the Inquiry Officer has exonerated the petitioner. It is further contended on behalf of the petitioner that the charges levelled against the petitioner are frivolous and he has been suspended for the charges for which he cannot held to be responsible, at all. 2 In the circumstances narrated above it is provided that the petitioner may make representation before the respondent no. 2 raising all his grievances mentioning therein that he has already been exonerated by the Inquiry Officer, in pursuance of the earlier suspension order, for the same charges which have been levelled in the present chargesheet and considering these facts, the suspension order may be revoked. After receipt of the representation, if any, in case the respondent comes to the conclusion that the petitioner has been suspended for the identical charges for which inquiry was conducted and the petitioner was exonerated, he will pass fresh orders in the matter and in case, the charges levelled against the petitioner in the earlier suspension order were different to the present one, the inquiry shall continue and the Disciplinary Authority is directed to pass final order, after holding inquiry against the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. It is made clear that the petitioner shall cooperate with the inquiry. The petitioner is directed to submit a certified copy of this order before the respondent no. 2 within a period of one week from today. The Stay Application no. 10840/06 stands disposed of accordingly. With this direction, the writ petition is finally disposed of. (M.M. Ghildiyal, J.) August 24, 2006: NCM: