Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:30101 Court No. - 4 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1888 of 2025 Petitioner :- Pramod Kumar Tiwari, Sub- Inspector Respondent :- The State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Atipriya Gautam,Shyam Sharan Shrivastava,Vinod Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J. Heard Sri Vijay Gautam, learned senior counsel assisted by Ms. Atipriya Gautam, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel for the respondents. By way of present petition, petitioner is challenging the suspension order dated 31.12.2024 on the ground that it has been passed without objective satisfaction of the disciplinary authority i.e. respondent no. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that after suspension, another order dated 18.01.2025 has been passed by respondent no. 4 for preliminary enquiry with reference to impugned suspension order dated 31.12.2024. He next submitted that after suspension, order of preliminary enquiry clearly shows that no material is available before the respondents to pass the suspension order. Therefore, such order is bad and in teeth of judgment of this Court passed in the matter of Sachchida Nand Tripathi Vs. State of U.P. And 2 2 Others (Writ A No. 69308 of 2013) and also Government Orders dated 14.07.2015, 30.08.2018 and 25.07.2021. Under such facts of the case, suspension order dated 31.12.2024 is bad and liable to be set aside. Learned standing counsel could not dispute the aforesaid facts. Accordingly, writ petition is allowed and impugned suspension order dated 31.12.2024 passed by respondent no. 3 is hereby quashed. However, liberty is given to the respondents to pass fresh order in accordance with law after obtaining report of preliminary enquiry instituted vide order dated 31.12.2024. No order as to costs. Order Date :- 3.3.2025 Sanjeev Digitally signed by :- SANJEEV RANJAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad