Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 166887 (ALL)

MOHD. MIYAN v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HIGHER EDU. LKO. AND 2 OTHERS

WRIA/9977/2024 · 2025-08-01

Abdul Moin

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:44800 Court No. - 5 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 9977 of 2024 Petitioner :- Mohd. Miyan Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Higher Edu. Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Jayant Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Vivek Kumar Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State-respondent No.1 2. Despite the name of Sri Vivek Kumar, Advocate, being indicated in the cause list from the side of the respondents, and despite he having filed a vakalatnama on behalf of respondents No. 2 and 3, neither is he present nor has there been any request for adjournment in the matter; therefore, the Court proceeds to hear and decide the matter finally. 3. The petitioner has prayed for quashing of the suspension order dated 10.02.2015, a copy of which is annexure-1 to the petition; for reinstatement to the post of Lab Bearer in the respondent institution; and for payment of salary for the period during which he remained under suspension on account of his involvement in a criminal case. 4. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner was placed under suspension vide order dated 10.02.2015 on account of his incarceration in jail, as a criminal case had been lodged against him. 5. It is contended that the criminal case, namely, Sessions Trial No. 318 of 2015 in re: State of U.P. vs. Mohd. Miyan Rizvi, has resulted in the acquittal of the petitioner vide judgment and order dated 20.07.2024, a copy of which is annexure-4 to the petition. 6. Subsequently, the respondents have revoked the suspension vide order dated 21.10.2024. However, no order has been passed regarding the salary for the period during which the petitioner remained under suspension, i.e., from 10.02.2015 to 21.10.2024. 7. Considering the aforesaid and that as the final order with regard to the salary of the petitioner for a period of suspension is to be passed by the respondent No.3, as such, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.3 to consider the claim of the petitioner for payment of salary for a period of suspension i.e. 10.02.2015 to 21.10.2024. in accordance with law under relevant Rules. 8. Let a decision be taken within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. [Abdul Moin, J.] Order Date :- 1.8.2025 cks/- Digitally signed by :- CHANDRA KANT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench