Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:8344-DB Court No. - 1 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 24292 of 2020 Petitioner :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Tax And Registration Lucknow And Ors Respondent :- Abdul Majeed Siddiqui Counsel for Petitioner :- C.S.C. Counsel for Respondent :- Rajesh Chandra Dixit,Sanjai Srivastava Hon'ble Attau Rahman Masoodi,J. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. Heard Sri Gopal Kumar Srivastava, the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Ms. Manu Saxena, Advocate holding brief of Sri Sanjai Srivastava, the learned counsel for the opposite party and perused the records. 2. By means of the instant writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged the validity of a judgment and order dated 06.12.2018, passed by State Public Services Tribunal in Claim Petition No.531 of 2013: Abdul Majeed Siddiqui Vs. State of U.P. and others. The aforesaid claim petition had been filed by the opposite party/claimant challenging an order dated 17.12.2009 whereby a major punishment of stoppage of two annual increments with cumulative effect was inflicted upon him. He had also challenged the validity of an order dated 16.05.2012, whereby the appeal filed against the punishment order dated 17.12.2009 was rejected. 3. While the opposite party was working as a Registration Clerk in the office of Sub Registrar, Gonda, he was placed under suspension by means of an order dated 28.11.2008. An enquiry was instituted against him and the enquiry report dated 18.02.2009 exonerated him of all the charges. On 14.05.2009, the Inspector General (Registration) U.P. Allahabad sought information from the enquiry officer about certain stamp cases mentioned in the charge sheet. The enquiry officer sent the requisite information through a letter dated 23.07.2009. Thereafter, a show cause notice dated 17.09.2009 was issued to the opposite party, to which he has submitted reply on 01.10.2009. Thereafter, the punishment order dated 17.12.2009 was passed holding the opposite party guilty of negligence in performance of his duty. 4. The Tribunal found that admittedly, the opposite party had been exonerated of all the charges in the enquiry report. No mention of the letter dated 23.07.2009 giving information regarding some stamp cases was made in the charge sheet and this letter was not placed as evidence during the enquiry. The stamp cases in question were pending at the time of submission of the report and the information dated 23.07.2009. 5. The Tribunal held that when no final decision had been taken in the stamps cases, no punishment order could have been passed placing reliance on the letter dated 23.07.2009. The Tribunal further held that the opposite party could not have been held guilty till a final decision of the stamp cases. The learned Standing Counsel could not inform the final status of the stamp cases even to this court. 6. For the aforesaid reasons, the learned Public Services Tribunal allowed the claim petition and set aside the punishment order and the appellate order. 7. Having gone through the reasons given by the Tribunal for allowing the claim petition, which have been mentioned above, we find no illegality in the same warranting interference by this court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction. 8. The writ petition lacks merit and the same is accordingly dismissed. [Subhash Vidyarthi, J.] [A.R. Masoodi, J.] Order Date :- 10.2.2025 Ram. Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench