Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 198796 (ALL)

SURESHCHANDRA ARUN v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. AYUSH ANUBHAG 2 LKO. AND 3 OTHERS

WRIC/9417/2025 · 2025-10-06

Amitabh Kumar Rai, Sangeeta Chandra

Public Interest Litigationbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 9417 of 2025 Court No. - 2 HON'BLE MRS. SANGEETA CHANDRA, J. HON'BLE AMITABH KUMAR RAI, J. 1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State Respondent. 2. This petition has been filed with the following main prayer:- "Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the Opposite Party No.3 to take the necessary measures in respect of the letter posted to him on dated: 28.06.2025 by the petitioner, against the fraudulent and illegal activities being carried on by the opposite party no.04. i.e. Dr. Rajiv Sharma, District Homeopathy Medical Officer, District- Pilibhit, U.P., copy of the letter posted on dated: 28.06.2025 by the petitioner has been enclosed as ANNEXURE NO-1." 3. It is the case of the petitioner that he is a contractual employee working in District Pilibhit under the supervision of the District Homeopathic Medical Officer. It has come to his notice that Rs.5000/- is being illegally collected from each hospital functioning under the Homeopathic Department of District Pilibhit. Such collection is being done at the instance of the District Homeopathic Medical Officer, Dr. Rajiv Sharma. 4. It has been submitted further that the Attendance Registers are being Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Abhishek Singh, Sanjana Chaturvedi Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Sureshchandra Arun .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Ayush Anubhag 2 Lko. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) manipulated and details of all Medical Officers need to be examined for the past six months so as to ascertain that such officers who are marking their attendance have reached their places of duty on time. Moreover, salaries, Earned Leave and Child Care Leave of certain officers are being arbitrarily withheld. 5. It has also been stated, on the basis of letters dated 26.02.2025 and 18.03.2025, that such collection is being done in an arbitrary manner from all employees. 6. Having gone through the letter dated 18.03.2025 issued by Dr. Rajiv Sharma, District Homeopathic Medical Officer, Pilibhit and the letter dated 26.02.2025 again issued by the same officer, we are prima facie of the opinion that such collection could not have been done from the employees. 7. Learned Standing Counsel has produced before this Court a copy of instructions dated 22.09.2025 sent by the District Homeopathic Medical Officer, Pilibhit, who is the same officer, the respondent no. 4 against whom such complaint has been made by the petitioner. 8. It is evident from a perusal of the same that Government Orders dated 01.08.1997 and 19.04.2012 which have also been filed along with the copy of the said instructions wherein it is required that any person making a complaint may file such complaint along with an affidavit indicating his correct identity and address. 9. The complaint made by the petitioner is not in accordance with the procedure as mentioned in the said Government Orders. However, it appears also from the said instructions that on the basis of some complaint made by the petitioner, the District Magistrate has instituted an enquiry asking the Additional District Magistrate (Finance and Revenue) to submit a report in this regard. It appears that the respondent no. 4 has also submitted his explanation to the notice issued to him. 10. Instructions are kept on record. 11. This petition is disposed of with a direction to the District Magistrate, WRIC No. 9417 of 2025 2 Pilibhit to ensure that such enquiry is completed expeditiously. However, since the complaint of the petitioner is not in accordance with the procedure that has been prescribed under the two Government Orders as aforesaid, it would be appropriate for the petitioner to file his complaint along with a duly signed affidavit in this regard before the Director, Department of Homeopathy and Medicine, the respondent no. 2, who may then institute a proper preliminary fact-finding enquiry into the complaint made by the petitioner and then take appropriate action against the respondent no. 4, if so required. October 6, 2025 Rahul WRIC No. 9417 of 2025 3 (Amitabh Kumar Rai,J.) (Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAHUL TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- RAHUL TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- RAHUL TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench