RAMAKANT MISHRA v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. CHIEF SECY. DEPTT. OF PANCHAYATI RAJ LKO. AND ANOTHER
SPLA/367/2025 · 2025-10-17
Rajan Roy, Rajeev Bharti
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 197110 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 197110 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 367 of 2025 Court No. - 1 HON'BLE RAJAN ROY, J.
HON'BLE RAJEEV BHARTI, J.
1. Heard.
2. This is an appeal challenging the judgment and order dated 09.10.2025 by which appellant's writ petition challenging suspension order dated 21.08.2025 has been rejected.
3. Two contentions were raised by the appellant's counsel before the writ court. One that the suspension order did not mention about any notice having been issued under Rule 10 of the U.P Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999 (in short 'the Rules, 1999') for minor penalties. Second was that the entire action was on account of a complaint made by one Raghavendra with whom the appellant's family had a dispute. Learned Single Judge has opined that non-mentioning of any notice under Rule 10 of the Rules, 1999 does not vitiate the suspension order as suspension has been resorted to in contemplation of the disciplinary proceedings which is permissible under Rule 4 of the Rules,
1999. Secondly, the suspension order does not mention any complaint by Raghvendra Singh, therefore, that aspect can't be seen and the said complaint was subject matter of notice dated 21.07.2025 which is also not mentioned in the order of suspension. The suspension, in fact, has been done in contemplation of disciplinary inquiry relating to several allegations such as non-joining at the transferred place, behaving in an Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Jayshanker Shukla, Anurag Dwivedi, Naveen Shukla Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Ramakant Mishra .....Appellant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Panchayati Raj Lko. And Another .....Respondent(s)
indisciplined manner, no complying the orders of higher authorities etc. We have gone through the judgment of writ court and do not find any error therein.
4. Accordingly, the special appeal is dismissed.
5. If charge-sheet has not been issued as yet and it is not issued hereafter within the next six weeks then it shall be open for the appellant to approach the writ court again.
6. Sri Anand Singh, learned Addl. C.S.C. shall communicate our order to the disciplinary authority for necessary action. October 17, 2025 Shanu/- SPLA No. 367 of 2025 2 (Rajeev Bharti,J.) (Rajan Roy,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHANU SUMAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench