PUSHP DEV v. U.P. POWER CORPORATION LTD. THRU. CHAIRMAN LKO AND 4 OTHERS
WRIA/5534/2025 · 2025-07-18
Abdul Moin
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 140613 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 140613 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:41259 Court No. - 5 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5534 of 2025 Petitioner :- Pushp Dev Respondent :- U.P. Power Corporation Ltd. Thru. Chairman Lko And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shrish Kumar Gaur Counsel for Respondent :- Neerav Chitravanshi Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J.
1. Counter affidavit filed by Sri Neerav Chitravanshi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, is taken on record. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that he does not intend to file rejoinder affidavit and prays that the matter may be heard and decided finally. 3. Heard Shri Shrish Kumar Gaur, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Neerav Chitravanshi, learned counsel for the respondents. 4. Instant writ petition has been filed seeking following reliefs:-
"(i) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned order of punishment dated 07.06.2023 & 24.01.2025 passed by opposite party No.3 and 2 as contained in Annexure No.01 & 02 to the writ petition. (ii) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to grant all service benefit including the monetary benefits consequent upon quashing of impugned orders dated 07.06.2023 & 24.01.2025 as contained in annexure No.1 & 2 to the writ petition. (c)... (d)...."
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the matter in issue is squarely covered by the judgment and order dated 19.10.2023 passed by this Court in Writ A No.10999 of 2023 In Re Rajeev Kumar vs State of U.P. & Ors, a copy of which is Annexure-12 to the petition. 6. To the aforesaid, learned counsel for the respondents states that aforesaid judgment would not be applicable to the facts of the present case but he is not in a position to persuade this Court to take a different view than that taken in the order dated
19.10.2023. 7. For the sake of convenience, the operative part of the order dated 19.10.2023 is reproduced below:-
"23. In the result, this petition succeeds and is allowed. The impugned order dated 07.06.2023 passed by the Managing Director, Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Limited, Lucknow is hereby quashed. The respondents are ordered to reinstate the petitioner in service forthwith, and pay him current salary from the date of this judgment.
If, however, the respondents choose to place the petitioner again under suspension in view of the liberty hereinafter indicated, the petitioner shall be paid his subsistence allowance regularly. The respondents shall be at liberty to undertake inquiry afresh in the matter, on the basis of the charge-sheet, already issued. The respondents in that event will proceed, bearing in mind the guidance in this judgment. If the respondents elect to proceed against the petitioner as per liberty given, it would be open to the respondents either to reinstate the petitioner, assigning him duties or not, but paying salary to him, or place him under suspension pending the inquiry to be held afresh. The question of payment of back- wages shall depend upon the outcome of the inquiry and the decision taken by the respondents in the proceedings, if they elect to pursue such proceedings. It is also ordered that if fresh proceedings are taken, the same shall be concluded expeditiously, wherein the petitioner shall cooperate. There shall be no order as to costs."
8. Considering the aforesaid, the writ petition is allowed. Orders dated 24.01.2025 and 07.06.2023 passed by the respondents No.2 and 3 are quashed. Consequences to follow. The respondents shall be at liberty to undertake a fresh enquiry in accordance with law. Order Date :- 18.7.2025 A. Katiyar Digitally signed by :- AMIT KATIYAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench