Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:48097 Court No. - 4 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 8465 of 2025 Petitioner :- Yadvendra Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Basic Education Deptt. U.P. Lko. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajay Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Nitin Mathur, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. With the consent of learned counsels for the parties the writ petition is being decided finally. 3. Under challenge is the notice dated 19.07.2025 issued by respondent no.4 i.e. Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Sultanpur, a copy of which is Annexure-4 to the petition. Further prayer is for a mandamus commanding the respondents not to harass the petitioner on the basis of the complaints. 4. The complaints are said to have been made pertaining to the alleged experience certificate of the petitioner alleging that the said certificate is fake. 5. The facts of the case have already been set forth in detail in the order dated 31.07.2025, which, for the sake of convenience, is reproduced below:- "Heard. The petitioner being aggrieved with the notice dated 19.07.2025, a copy of which is annexure 4 to the writ petition issued by the Office of the Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Sultanpur is before this Court. Contention is that the notice indicates that on the basis of the complaint which has been submitted, the petitioner has been required to indicate about his experience certificate which is alleged to be fake. Contention is that earlier too, a complaint had been submitted against the fake experience certificate of the petitioner which has been verified and consequently, there cannot be any occasion for the respondents to have issued one notice after other for the same thing and the petitioner cannot be harassed again and again for the same. However, perusal of the documents which have been indicated by the learned counsel for the petitioner in support of the certificate having been verified earlier prima facie do not indicate anywhere that the experience certificate for which the complaint has been submitted, has been found to be genuine. Suggestion has been made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Court itself may call for the records in order to give a quietus in the matter. Considering the aforesaid, let the respondents verify the experience certificate of the petitioner which according to the learned counsel for the petitioner is an experience certificate dated 09.07.2015, a copy of which is annexure 14 to the writ petition. Sri Ran Vijay Singh, learned counsel for the respondents prays for and is granted ten days time to verify the aforesaid experience certificate of the petitioner. After verification, relevant records in this regard be also produced before this Court. List this case on 18.08.2025 as fresh. The petitioner is also cautioned that in case the verification certificate is found to be fake and fictitious then necessary consequences may follow." 6. Today, Sri Nitin Mathur, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, on the basis of instructions dated 12.08.2025 sent by the District Inspector of Schools, Sutanpur, informs that the experience certificate of the petitioner has been verified and has been found to be genuine. 7. The aforesaid statement of Sri Mathur is recorded. 8. Considering the experience certificate for which complaint has been made and the petitioner has been asked to show cause has already been verified as such there cannot be any occasion for the respondents to issue repeated show cause notices to the petitioner pertaining to his experience certificate. As such, the aforesaid show cause notice dated 19.07.2025, a copy of which is Annexure-4 to the petition, is set-aside. 9. The writ petition is accordingly allowed. Order Date :- 18.8.2025 A. Katiyar Digitally signed by :- AMIT KATIYAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench