Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 24795 (ALL)

SMT. MAMTA TRIPATHI v. STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

WRIA/2840/2025 · 2025-03-04

Saurabh Shyam Shamshery

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:31091 Court No. - 10 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 2840 of 2025 Petitioner :- Smt. Mamta Tripathi Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Hari Shankar Tripathi,Shailendra Kumar Upadhyay Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sandeep Kumar Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J. 1.Heard Sri Shailendra Kumar Upadhyay, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Sandeep Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents. 2. This Court has encountered with another writ petition which is bereft of even essential pleadings. Even proper grounds are not taken. It appears that it has been drafted by someone else or by the typist. Still considering that petitioner has a good case since at the stage when show cause notice was issued to the petitioner by the Appointing Authority and when the petitioner sought time, neither it was rejected nor allowed and immediately thereafter exparte impugned order was passed. 3. Impugned order does not reflect details of proposal and how independent mind was applied, therefore, procedure of Departmental Enquiry is vitiated at the stage of show cause notice. Therefore, impugned order dated 31.12.2024 passed by respondent no.4 is set-aside. However, Manager of Committee of Management will be at liberty to continue with the process at the stage of show cause notice and petitioner is directed to file reply, if any, within a period of two weeks after receipt of fresh show cause notice and thereafter the Appointing Authority may conclude the inquiry in accordance with law preferably within a period of six weeks. 4. Argument of learned counsel for the respondents that proper party i.e. Committee of Management, through its Manager (who has passed the impugned order) has not been impleaded therefore, this writ petition may be dismissed, however since the error in impugned order is writ large, therefore, in exercise of writ jurisdiction above referred order could be passed even in case there is misjoinder of parties. 5. The counsel for petitioner shall remain cautious in future. Petitioner will serve a copy of this order upon the Manager of Committee of Management concerned. 6. With the aforesaid direction, this writ petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 5.3.2025 SB Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP BHATTACHARYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad