1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent no.1, Sri Tushar Mittal, learned counsel for respondent no.2, and Sri Manish Singh Chauhan, learned counsel for respondent no.3.
2. The crux of the issue urged is that the petitioner, a Clerk in the Institution of the respondents, has been suspended vide order dated 11.09.2024, a copy of which is Annexure-1 to the petition.
3. Reliance had been placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner on the information obtained under Right to Information Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act, 2005') given by respondent no.2-the University per which the tenure of the earlier Committee of Management had ended on 19.03.2024 and the new Committee is under process. The information has been given on 12.12.2024.
4. The argument is that once there was no Committee of Management as on the date of passing of the order impugned dated 11.09.2024 consequently the order of suspension having been passed by the Committee of Management is per se illegal.
5. Today learned counsel for respondent no.3 has produced the copy of the renewal certificate of the society per which the renewal of the society has been granted w.e.f. 30.03.2024 for a period of five years. The certificate has been issued on 20.11.2024.
6. Considering the aforesaid certificate it is thus apparent that as on date of suspension of the petitioner the Committee of Management was very well in existence. Thus, the only ground which has been urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner for raising a challenge to the suspension order no longer subsists.
7. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner states that as subsequent to the suspension order a charge sheet has been issued to which reply has already been submitted by the petitioner as such the competent authority be directed to conclude the inquiry within a specified time.
8. Considering the aforesaid the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the competent authority to conclude the inquiry against the petitioner in accordance with law and relevant rules which inquiry would be concluded within period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
9. Needless to mention that the petitioner shall cooperate in the inquiry proceedings and in case the petitioner does not cooperate, the Inquiry Officer would be at liberty to inform the petitioner in writing about his non-cooperation and the period of non-cooperation would be excluded from the aforesaid period.
