Judgment Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. 1. The petitioner is a Revenue Sub-Inspector (Earlier known as “Patwari”). He is aggrieved by his suspension order dated 27th September, 2014 passed by the Collector/District Magistrate, Almora. Prima facie, there are several flaws in the suspension order such as it does not disclose that the charges against the petitioner are so serious that when proved it will entail a major penalty. As per Rule 4(1) of Uttarakhand Government Servants (Discipline and Appeal) Amendment Rules, 2010 a suspension order must clearly mention that the charges are so serious that if proved it will entail a major penalty. There is no such mention in the suspension order. Even otherwise also the only charge against the petitioner, as mentioned in the suspension order, is that the petitioner gave a wrong certificate to one Mahendra Mainali. Further the suspension order also does not reflect whether the disciplinary proceedings have been initiated against the petitioner or whether it is under contemplation. 2. In view thereof, the operation and effect of the impugned suspension order dated 27.09.2014 shall remain stayed till the next date of listing. It is, however, made clear that stay of the suspension order would not prohibit the disciplinary authority to take any disciplinary action against the petitioner in accordance with law including initiation of disciplinary proceedings. 3. State counsel has accepted notice for all the respondents. 4. Respondents shall file their reply within three weeks. Three weeks time thereafter is granted to the petitioner to file rejoinder affidavit. 5. List this matter after seven weeks in a daily cause list. 6. Stay Application (CLMA) No.11890 of 2014 stands disposed of.