HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 390 of 2017 Court No. - 1 HON'BLE RAJAN ROY, J. HON'BLE RAJEEV BHARTI, J. 1. Heard. 2. This is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 22.08.2017, passed in Writ Petition No.19094 (S/S) of 2017 by which the writ petition filed by the appellant-petitioner challenging the communications issued by the Special Secretary of Forest Department of the State for initiating proceedings against the appellant-petitioner for certain irregularities in the plantation of trees in Pandir Kripal Range during 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14 was under challenge. The petition was dismissed, hence this appeal. 3. State has not filed counter affidavit in spite of the orders in this appeal. There is an interim order dated 07.10.2017 operating by which the orders dated 11.07.2017, 19.07.2017 and 20.07.2017 impugned in the writ petition in so far as it related to the appellant-petitioner were stayed on 07.10.2017. By the same order time was granted to the Standing Counsel to obtain instructions and produce the relevant reports before the Court which could indicate that there was any involvement of the appellant which could be termed as misconduct so that disciplinary proceedings could be initiated against the appellant as, prima facie from the material available on record and from the instructions received by then, the Court was unable to find any material on the basis of which any disciplinary proceedings could be initiated against him at that stage. Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Ajay Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Santosh Kumar Mishra .....Appellant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. For Forest And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) 4. The case of the appellant is that he was posted in the concerned range only in September 2016, therefore, he could not be held responsible for any irregularities of the earlier years. The State has not filed any counter affidavit. The writ petition was disposed of on the first day itself without calling a counter affidavit. Adverse inference is drawn against the State Authorities on account of their failure to file counter affidavit in spite of several opportunities granted in this appeal. 5. We, accordingly, quash the impugned judgment passed by the learned Single Judge as it does not take into consideration relevant aspects/pleas in its correct prospective. The orders impugned before the Writ Court are also quashed as there is no material to justify the impugned action. 6. The appeal is allowed. Consequences to follow accordingly. October 17, 2025 Anand/- SPLA No. 390 of 2017 2 (Rajeev Bharti,J.) (Rajan Roy,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench