HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 14910 of 2025 Court No. - 34 HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J. 1. Heard Sri Santosh Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the writ petitioner as well as Sri Rahul Malviya, learned Standing Counsel for the State. 2. A joint statement has been made by learned counsel for the parties that they do not propose to file any affidavit and the petition be decided on the basis of the documents available on record. With the consent of the parties, the petition be decided at the fresh stage. 3. The case of the writ petitioner is that he was appointed as Gram Vikas Adhikari on 03.12.1999 and he is presently posted as Gram Vikas Adhikari, Gram Panchayat Chilla Shahbazi, Block Chayal/Kara, District Kaushambi since 09.11.2023. According to the writ petitioner on 10.09.2025, an order came to be passed by District Development Officer, Block Chayal/Kara, District Kaushambi placing the writ petitioner under suspension on the ground that on 09.09.2025 when the writ petitioner was posted as Gram Vikas Adhikari then in the village panchayat in question an inspection took place and near the Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar Park, garbage was found in huge quantity and witnessing the same, the Commissioner, Prayagraj Mandal became annoyed which occasioned the writ petitioner to be placed under suspension. 4. Questioning the suspension order, the writ petitioner has filed the present writ petition. 5. Learned counsel for the writ petitioner has submitted that the suspension order cannot be sustained for the simple reason that the Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Himanshu Kushawaha, Santosh Kumar Rai Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Kuldeep Narayan Mishra .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) consideration which weighed the District Development Officer, Block Chayal, District Kaushambi are not sufficient to place the writ petitioner under suspension particularly when it is the duty of the sweeper to clean the garbage and further the writ petitioner while working on the post of Gram Vikas Adhikari used to keep vigilance that the cleanliness is there, however, he submits that assimilation of garbage are relatable to various factors and for act and omission on the part of the sweeper would not be a ground to suspend the writ petitioner. He submits that even otherwise on the face of the allegations contained in the suspension, no major penalty can be imposed as he seeks to rely upon the provisions contained under the U.P. Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999. Learned counsel for the writ petitioner further submits that lack of supervision or attainment of higher standards cannot be a ground to term it a misconduct. He seeks to rely upon the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in Union of India Vs. Jamil Ahmad : AIR 1979 Supreme Court 1022 and a decision of this Court in Ram Dular Tripathi Vs. State of U.P. : 1997 (31) ALR 605. Learned counsel for the writ petitioner submits that the writ petitioner shall cooperate with the inquiry and he is not shy to face the inquiry in that regard and he would also not influence the inquiry in any manner whatsoever. 6. Sri Rahul Malviya, learned Standing Counsel submits that whatever might be it is the duty of the writ petitioner while working as Gram Vikas Adhikari, he was required to advise and instruct the subordinates to keep the place clean as it is the policy of the State Government that the garbage should be in the dust bin and it should not be scattered in public places. He, however, submits that whatever might the inquiry proceedings be allowed to be conducted and concluded within the time. 7. Looking into the overall fact situation including the allegations so sought to be levelled regarding the spreading of the garbage during the course of the inspection and also the fact that the writ petitioner happens to be Gram Vikas Adhikari, the writ petition is being decided in the following term.- (a) the suspension order dated 10.09.2025 passed by District Development Officer, Kaushambi is set aside; (b) the inquiry proceedings against the writ petitioner shall be concluded within a period of three WRIA No. 14910 of 2025 2 months from the date of production of certified copy; (c) the writ petitioner shall cooperate in the inquiry proceedings; (c) in case, the writ petitioner does not cooperate with the inquiry proceedings then the disciplinary authority shall proceed to pass an order strictly in accordance with law. 8. With the said observation, the writ petition stands disposed of. October 15, 2025 Rajesh WRIA No. 14910 of 2025 3 (Vikas Budhwar,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad