P. Sam Koshy, J
1. The challenge in the present writ petition is to the charge sheet dated 19.05.2017 passed by the respondents.
2. The petitioner has challenged the same on the ground of the charges being fake and issued with malafide intention. Without entering into the merits,
so far as the allegations, which have been leveled against the petitioner, this Court does not intend to interfere with the charge sheet for the simple
reason that the same has been issued almost about 1 ½ years ago i.e. on 19.05.2017. The petitioner for about 1 ½ years was not aggrieved by the
decision of the respondents in proceeding against him departmentally.
3. For the said reason, this Court does not find any strong case for interference. However, though this Court is reluctant to interfere with the charge
sheet, but it is expected that the respondents shall conclude the inquiry so far as the petitioner is concerned at the earliest.
4. The contention of the petitioner is that the departmental enquiry seems to have been stayed by this Court in the case of one Mr. Deman
Chandrakar. If that be the case also, the interim protection granted to Deman Chandrakar would only be applicable so far as the departmental enquiry
against Deman Chandrakar is concerned. The said order cannot be taken into account for not proceeding with the departmental enquiry so far as the
petitioner is concerned.
5. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed off.
