Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:57361 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11689 of 2023 Petitioner :- Anupam Kushwaha Respondent :- State Of Up And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Sr. Advocate Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Santosh Kumar Yadav Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J. Mr. Ashok Khare, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Aditendra Singh, counsel for the petitioner rightly submitted that in similar circumstance, this Court has passed an order dated 10.03.2025 in Writ - A No. 1590 of 2025 (Lokesh Kumar Mirgh vs. State of U.P. and 3 Ors.; 2025: AHC:34621) whereby writ petition was allowed and he referred relevant parts thereof. For reference, its paragraph nos. 9, 10 and 11 are reproduced hereinbelow:- "9. I have considered the above rival submissions and perused the record. The petitioner and his father was required to submit a correct affidavit and they were bound to disclose all facts correctly, however, petitioner has not disclosed that his father was working and even his father has not stated that he was working as a Garrison Engineer at relevant time. 10. In the aforesaid circumstances, petitioner and his father are guilty of withholding material information since financial status of family is a very relevant factor to consider an application for appointment on compassionate ground and for that a factor that petitioner's father was working as a Garrison Engineer was relevant. 11. In the aforesaid circumstances, the Court also takes note that petitioner was appointed as a Class IV employee on 19.10.2010 i.e. about 15 years ago and objection was taken for the first time in the year 2023 i.e. after more than a decade, therefore, at this stage, to terminate the petitioner from service would not be in the interest of justice, therefore, even it the petitioner and his father has suppressed the material information, still in peculiar facts of present case, impugned order dated 06.01.2023 is set aside and its consequential order of recovery dated 09.01.2023 is also set aside. 12. Accordingly, writ petition is allowed." Mr. Ashish Nagvanshi, learned counsel for the State submits that there are submissions on question of law. However, he is not able to dispute that petitioner's case is on a better footing than the case of Lokesh Kumar Mirg(supra). In the aforesaid circumstances, since facts of present case are squarely covered by Lokesh Kumar Mirg(supra), therefore, this writ petition is also allowed in same terms. Impugned order dated 23.05.2023 is set aside. Order Date :- 18.4.2025 Vipasha Digitally signed by :- VIPASHA MUKHERJEE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad