HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 15004 of 2025 Court No. - 32 HON'BLE SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J. 1. Heard Sri Prabhakar Awasthi, learned counsel for petitioner, Sri Ashish Mohan Srivastava, learned Standing Counsel for State-Respondents and Sri Vikrant Pandey, Advocate for Respondent-4. 2. Petitioner (Tarun Kumar), Respondent-3 (Sri Dhruv Maggu, Principal, Government Industrial Training Institution, Nandgaon, Mathura) and Respondent-4 (Sri Rajeev Kumar Sharma, Senior Assistant, Government Industrial Training Institute, Vrindavan, Mathura), are present in person. 3. In this writ petition, petitioner has made multiple averments about the nature of proceedings initiated against him as well as there are allegations against Complainant, i.e., Respondent-4, also. 4. At this stage, Court is not venturing into such allegations since still there is an opportunity to petitioner to make all submissions in disciplinary proceedings, which has been initiated vide order dated 03.09.2025 whereby petitioner has been put under suspension and an Inquiry Officer was also appointed, however, till date no charge sheet has been submitted. 5. In the circumstances, concerned respondent is directed to submit charge sheet within seven days from today. Petitioner shall file reply to charge sheet within two weeks thereafter. Within four weeks thereafter inquiry report shall be submitted to Disciplinary Authority, who will take appropriate decision in accordance with law within three weeks thereafter. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Prabhakar Awasthi, Saurabh Tripathi Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Tarun Kumar .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) 6. I find merit in the argument of learned counsel for petitioner that on basis of a report of a Three Members Committee and without proceeding in terms of relevant provisions, an order dated 03.09.2025 was passed whereby a direction was issued to recover more than Rs. 15 lacs from petitioner though it ought not to have been passed since the same has to be dealt with in disciplinary proceedings. Therefore, the order dated 03.09.2025, so far it relates to recovery from petitioner, is hereby set aside. However, respondents will have liberty to frame such charge in disciplinary proceedings, if so advised. 7. Multiple documents are placed on record which show that conduct of Respondent-4 is not bona fide though it has been disputed by learned counsel appearing for Respondent-4. Still the Court takes note of some of the documents annexed alongwith this writ petition wherein Respondent-4 has shown himself to be an Officer of Government. If it is true then it is a case of initiation of criminal proceedings against said respondent. 8. At this stage, it is informed that a First Information Report has already been lodged against Respondent-4 on 05.12.2022 for such allegations, which is under challenge before this Court and probably arrest has been stayed, however, investigation has not been stayed, therefore, the same may be carried out in accordance with law, expeditiously, subject to any order, if passed by a Division Bench of this Court. 9. So far as present writ petition is concerned, since disciplinary proceeding is initiated at the instance of Respondent-4, therefore, he has to owe the responsibility that in case complaint is found false or incorrect, the petitioner will have liberty to initiate civil or criminal proceedings, as the case may be. 10. Respondent-4 is directed to file a Notarized affidavit before Director, Government Industrial Training Institute, Lucknow within four days, specifically mentioning that in case complaint made against petitioner is found false, he will own the responsibility. WRIA No. 15004 of 2025 2 11. Respondent-4 is also directed to deposit a Draft of Rs. 1 lakh within four days before Director, Government Industrial Training Institute, Lucknow, to show his bona fide since it appears that he is a person who wants to take revenge, as it is also brought on record that he has been terminated from service. Deposit of money will be subject to outcome of disciplinary proceeding. 12. Respondent-4 is put on caution that he will remain careful in future while filing any complaint against any employee without any basis. State- Respondents are also put on caution that whenever any complaint is filed, they must ensure bona fide of Complainant and initiate inquiry only if law permits, though there is no bar to make complaint by any person if he has substance and has documentary evidence, disclosing source of it. 13. Respondent-4 will not enter within the premises of Institute concerned. Principal, Government Industrial Training Institute, Nandgaon, Mathura is duty bound to ensure that no stranger may enter within the premises of Institute concerned, except with due permission for any due work. 14. In case State-Respondents are failed to comply the time bound direction passed in para 5 of this order, impugned suspension order dated 03.09.2025 shall be kept in abeyance. Petitioner shall cooperate in inquiry. 15. With aforesaid observations/ directions, the writ petition is disposed of. October 9, 2025 AK WRIA No. 15004 of 2025 3 (Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.) Digitally signed by :- AWADESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad