Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:3421-DB Court No. - 1 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11238 of 2024 Petitioner :- Sanjeev Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohd. Nasir,Mohd. Yasir,Navneet Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Manish Mishra Hon'ble Attau Rahman Masoodi,J. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Nishant Shukla, the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel. 2. By means of the instant writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the validity of the part of the judgment and order dated 18.09.2024 passed by the State Public Services Tribunal, Lucknow in Claim Petition No. 2166 of 2022, whereby the petitioner's claim for payment of difference of salary for the period 17.11.2020 to 04.02.2021 has been rejected whereas the punishment order dated 30.11.2021 imposing the punishment of a censure entry and the appellate order dated 28.05.2022 and revisional order dated 25.08.2022 confirming the punishment order, have been set aside which the State has not chosen to assail. 3. The Tribunal has held that the punishment order was passed in an illegal manner and the same was upheld erroneously, therefore, the same was set aside. The tribunal has also observed that the disciplinary authority failed to consider the points raised by the petitioner in his defence, as such, the action taken was vitiated in the eyes of law. The tribunal held that the punishment order was not sustainable in law and the same was set aside. However, the tribunal rejected the claim petition in respect of payment of difference of salary for the period of suspension, without assigning any reason. 4. The petitioner had been placed under suspension by means of an order dated 17.11.2020 and an inquiry was instituted against him. On 04.01.2021, a preliminary inquiry report was given against him. The petitioner was reinstated in service by means of an order dated 04.02.2021 during pendency of the disciplinary proceedings against him. A copy of the preliminary inquiry report was provided to the petitioner along with a show cause notice dated 25.03.2021 whereby he was directed to show cause as to why a censure entry be not inflicted against him. The petitioner submitted his reply to the show cause notice on 12.04.2021. On 30.11.2021, the Superintendent of Police, Firozabad passed an order stating that the explanation of the petitioner was not found to be satisfactory and he imposed a punishment of censure entry against the petitioner. The disciplinary authority did not pass any order regarding payment of difference of salary to which the petitioner was entitled to during the suspension period. 5. The order of punishment has already been set aside which part of the cause has attained finality. The decision regarding payment of difference of salary payable to the petitioner during his suspension period which has remained undecided, is bound to be decided in the attending circumstances. 6. Accordingly, the judgment and order dated 18.09.2024 passed by the State Public Services Tribunal, Lucknow in Claim Petition No. 2166 of 2022 to the extent it rejects the claim of the petitioner for payment of difference of salary for the period 17.11.2020 to 04.02.2021, is set aside. 7. The Superintendent of Police, Firozabad is directed to pass a reasoned and speaking order regarding payment of difference of salary for the period 17.11.2020 to 04.02.2021, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order provided a fresh representation in this regard is filed by the petitioner alongwith the relevant material within a period of two weeks from today. 8. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 20.1.2025 Pradeep/- Digitally signed by :- PRADEEP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench