Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:18925 Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3486 of 2025 Petitioner :- Rakesh Kumar Rai Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Public Works Deptt. U.P. Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Avinash Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Shishir Jain Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J. 1. Heard Shri Avinash Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned State Counsel and Shri Shishir Jain, learned counsel for the opposite party nos.2 to 4. 2. By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has assailed order dated 01.03.2025 passed by the Managing Director, U.P. Rajkiya Nirman Nigam Limited, Lucknow providing three punishments to the petitioner and directing that F.I.R be lodged against him. Out of three punishments, punishment no.1 i.e. recovery is minor punishment and punishment no.2 i.e. withholding three annual increment with cumulative effect is a major punishment and punishment no.3 is the direction to the effect that the petitioner be not appointed on any sensitive posting. 3. Notably the aforesaid order has been passed in compliance of the order dated 05.07.2024 passed by this Court in Writ-A No.4797 of 2024, whereby earlier punishment order dated 29.04.2024 was quashed directing the opposite parties to proceed with inquiry afresh from the stage of submission of reply of the petitioner and that inquiry shall be concluded within a period of four months. 4. Shri Shishir Jain, learned counsel for the opposite party nos.2 to 4 has firstly submitted that the petitioner has been afforded ample opportunity to appear before the inquiry officer to collect the copies of the relied upon documents/relevant documents and he may also examine or have inspection of the documents, but to no avail as he did not appear before the inquiry officer on so many dates, which have been indicated in the impugned order itself. 5. Shri Jain has further submitted that against the impugned order, the petitioner has got alternative remedy in terms of Para- 706 of the Working Manual to file an appeal before the Board of Directors and the appellate authority may consider all the pleas and grounds, which would be taken by the petitioner after filing appeal. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that since the inquiry has not been conducted and concluded strictly in accordance with law by following procedure prescribed and charges have not been proved by the department conducting oral inquiry fixing date, time and place, therefore, the impugned punishment order may be set aside. 7. Be that as it may, since there is an alternative remedy to file an appeal and pursuant to the order dated 05.07.2024 fresh inquiry was conducted in terms of directions being issued by this Court, therefore, I am not convinced to interfere with the impugned order dated 01.03.2025 at this stage, relegating the petitioner to the appellate authority to file an appeal with expedition preferably within a period of fifteen days taking all pleas and grounds, which are available to him. If such appeal is filed, the appellate authority shall consider and dispose of that appeal strictly in accordance with law by passing speaking and reasoned order after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 8. It is needless to say that the pleas and grounds, which have been taken by the petitioner in this writ petition, may very well be taken before the appellate authority, who may consider those pleas and grounds as per law. 9. In view of the aforesaid terms, this writ petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 4.4.2025 Anupam S/- Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM SINGH PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench