Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:53498 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20696 of 2024 Petitioner :- Dhanejar Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajitabh Choubey,B.B.Rai Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J. 1. Heard Sri Ankit Sharma, Advocate holding brief of Sri Ajitabh Choubey, learned counsel for petitioner and Ms. Rajlakshmi Sinha, learned Standing Counsel for State. 2. The petitioner has approached this Court that appointment of respondent No.5 was based on forged educational documents, however, in writ petition, except averments, no substantial material is placed on record that educational documents of said respondent are forged. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner refers a document annexed as Annexure No.3 of this writ petition that on basis of complaint made by petitioner and one another, concerned S.D.M. has communicated to concerned D.B.S.A. on basis of direction of District Magistrate to appear before him along with relevant documents, however, the Court is not convinced that under which power or jurisdiction such letter was communicated since S.D.M. or D.M. has no power to conduct an inquiry in regard to teachers appointed in basic school except to forward any complaint in regard to concerned B.S.A. 4. Learned counsel also refers a subsequent communication dated 31.08.2022, whereby D.B.S.A. has sought information from Principal of concerned college and according to him, no inquiry was concluded and none appears before the D.M. or S.D.M. 5. I have considered the above submission and as referred above, S.D.M. has no power to conduct an inquiry, so far as appointment of respondent No.5 is concerned, therefore, in aforesaid circumstances, the inquiry initiated by S.D.M. on direction of D.M. cannot continue, however, in case, a fresh application is filed by petitioner annexing the relevant document in support of his allegation with an undertaking that in case, the complaint is found false, a criminal proceeding may be initiated against him, since on vague allegations, respondent No.5 cannot be put on trial. 6. The Court also takes note a judgment passed by this Court in Ashok Kumar Dwivedi Vs. State Of U.P. And 4 Others, 2025:AHC:6788, wherein similar direction was passed. 7. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with aforesaid liberty and in case such application is filed along with undertaking and relevant documents, the concerned B.S.A. will have liberty to consider it in accordance with law including to reject it at threshold if averments are vague. Order Date :- 11.4.2025 P. Pandey Digitally signed by :- PUSHPENDRA PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad