A. K. YOG, J. ( 1 ) BOTH the respondents are represented by their counsel Shri N. S. Chaudhary, Advocate and parties have exchanged counter and rejoinder-affidavits. Writ petition is finally decided at admission stage. ( 2 ) THIS petition has been filed against the order of termination dated 7th May. 1997 (Annexure-1 to the writ petition) dismissing from service of concerned Zila Parlshad of Etah. ( 3 ) A preliminary objection has been raised on behalf of the respondents on the ground of alternative remedy under Rule 42, U. P. Zila Parishad Rules. 1970. ( 4 ) THE learned counsel for the respondents submitted that this petition should not be entertained on any ground whatsoever since the petitioner had an alternative remedy under Rule 42. Uttar pradesh Zila Parishad Services Rules, 1970. ( 5 ) THIS position has been disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner and it is argued that this Court should not forestall the hearing of the petition on the ground of alternative remedy when the ground taken in the writ petition for challenging the impugned order is, apart from other grounds, violation of principles of natural Justice. ( 6 ) SHRI B. P. Singh learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance on Ratan Lal Sharma v. Managing Committee, AIR 1993 SC 2155 , (Paragraph 11 ). ( 7 ) WITHOUT recording facts in detail, it will suffice to mention that the only point raised by learned counsel for the petitioner at this stage was relating to the prejudice and personal interest of Sher Singh. the person, who was appointed as Enquiry Officer in the instant case and who submitted an adverse report against the petitioner which is the basis of termination. ( 8 ) RELEVANT facts have been stated in Paragraph 10 of the writ petition but the same has not been categorically and specifically denied in Paragraph 6 of the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that respondent no. 2 was the Head of the Committee, which dealt with the actions in question in respect of which charge has been framed against the petitioner and, therefore, according to him, said Sher singh could not act impartially. ( 9 ) OBJECTION to this effect was taken at the earliest by the petitioner as is evident from the following : 1. 2 was the Head of the Committee, which dealt with the actions in question in respect of which charge has been framed against the petitioner and, therefore, according to him, said Sher singh could not act impartially. ( 9 ) OBJECTION to this effect was taken at the earliest by the petitioner as is evident from the following : 1. Explanation of the petitioner dated 4th February, 1997 Writ Annexure-7 (particular page 44 of the Writ Paper Book ). 2. Petitioners letter dated 13th February, 1997--Writ Annexure-8 (particular page 54 of the Writ paper Book ). Objection was thus taken at the earliest and the post opportunity--as required by the ratio In the case (1997 ). 1 SCC 111 (Paragraph 15 ). ( 10 ) IT is a cardinal principle of rule of Law--that Justice need not only be done but also seems to have been done. ( 11 ) I find substance in the contention of the petitioner. ( 12 ) CONSEQUENTLY, the impugned order of termination is vitiated. It will not be out of place to mention that the request of the petitioner to change the Enquiry Officer at the earliest opportunity was turned down. This is not just and proper. Consequently, the termination order, which is based on a vitiated enquiry report cannot be sustained and, accordingly, set aside. In view of the statement made on behalf of the petitioner that he will be retiring in a couple of years. I direct the respondents and any other competent concerned authority to appoint enquiry officer afresh with direction to complete enquiry within two months as prayed by learned counsel for the petitioner from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment subject to the condition that petitioner shall cooperate in the enquiry. The enquiry officer so appointed shall be an officer other than Sher Singh-respondent No. 2. This Judgment shall, however, not be taken in any way casting aspersion upon the impartiality or Integrity of said Sher Singh. ( 13 ) DURING pendency of the enquiry, petitioner will be entitled to his future salary. Passing of this judgment shall abide by the resultant order passed later. It will be open to the employer to take work or not from the petitioner. ( 13 ) DURING pendency of the enquiry, petitioner will be entitled to his future salary. Passing of this judgment shall abide by the resultant order passed later. It will be open to the employer to take work or not from the petitioner. Question regarding payment of arrears of salary or any future salary after final decision in the matter shall abide by the final decision In pursuance of the present Judgment. ( 14 ) WRIT petition stands allowed subject to the objection directions made above.