SATWANT SINGH PNO. 212350681 v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. DEPTT. HOME LKO. AND 2 OTHERS
WRIA/2566/2025 · 2025-03-05
Alok Mathur
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 126856 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 126856 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:13299 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 2566 of 2025 Petitioner :- Satwant Singh Pno. 212350681 Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sudhir Kumar Misra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.
1. Heard Sri Sudhir Kumar Misra, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Chief Standing counsel Ms. Deepsikha for the respondents.
2. By means of the present writ petition the petitioner has assailed the order dated 23.8.2024 passed by Superintendent of Police, Hardoi thereby punishing the petitioner pursuant to departmental proceedings initiated against him and also the
order dated 16.1.2025 whereby the appellate authority has rejected the appeal filed against the order of punishment.
3. Learned Standing counsel has raised a preliminary objection that the petitioner has equally efficacious and alternate remedy available before U.P. State Public Service Tribunal (Tribunal in short) where all the grounds raised by the petitioner can be adequately considered.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner opposing the preliminary objection submits that the order impugned has been passed in violation of the principles of natural justice and consequently this Court would have jurisdiction to entertain the petition in exercise of the powers under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India.
5. I have heard the rival contentions.
6. It is noticed that the order of punishment can be assailed by the petitioner before the Tribunal and the power of this Court is discretionary power and considering that there are various disputed questions of facts which are involved in the present case, it would be in the fitness of things that the petitioner is relegated to alternate remedy before the Tribunal.
7. In light of the above, considering the fact that the petitioner has equally efficacious and alternate remedy available, the petition is dismissed. (Alok Mathur, J.)
Order Date :- 5.3.2025/RKM. Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench