HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 14610 of 2025 Court No. - 18 HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Tushar Mittal, learned counsel for respondent no. 2 and Dr. Uday Veer Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State. Mr. Tushar Mittal, learned counsel for respondent no. 2 has raised the preliminary that the punishment order has been passed by the Managing Director, under regulation 69 of the Regulations, named as the U.P. State Warehousing Corporation, Regulation 2021(hereinafter referred to as 'Regulation 2021'. He submitted that against the punishment order passed under regulation 69, the remedy of appeal is provided under regulation 79. Referring the regulation 6, wherein, the appellate authority is mentioned, he submitted that the appellate authority is the executive committee and the Managing Director by virtue of the post is the member of the executive committee. He submitted that so far as the Managing Director is concerned, he has passed the order while invoking the power under regulation 69 of the Regulation 2021, therefore, the order impugned is as per the law. He added that Chairman of the Board of Director, is the head of the Executive Committee and the Managing Director is the one of ex-officio member over there, thus, submission is that this writ petition is not maintainable. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner cannot go before the Executive Committee as the Managing Director, who has passed the order, is one of the ex-officio member of the Executive Committee. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Lakshmi Kant Tripathi, Shyam Mohan Pradhan Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Tushar Mittal Nafees Ahmad .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Karmik Anubhag Lko. And Another .....Respondent(s) Upon considering the submissions of counsel for the parties, it is apparent that under regulation 69, the Managing Director is empowered to pass the order of punishment and there is no jurisdictional error, in passing the order. So far as Regulation 2021 is concerned, the Executive Committee consists of one of the ex-officio members, that is, the Managing Director, therefore, unless the aforesaid regulation is challenged on the pretext that the Managing Director cannot be a member of the Executive Committee, it cannot be said that the order passed by the Managing Director cannot be challenged under appeal before the Executive Committee itself. In this view of the matter, the preliminary objection taken by counsel for the respondent sustains. Consequently, the present petition is not maintainable, thus, the same is hereby dismissed. Liberty is given to the petitioner to pursue the appropriate remedy. December 17, 2025 Mayank WRIA No. 14610 of 2025 2 (Shree Prakash Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- MAYANK PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench