Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:82081 Court No. - 4 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6865 of 2025 Petitioner :- Shekhar Respondent :- The State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Kailash Prakash Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J. 1. Heard Sri Kailash Prakash Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State. 2. By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the order of punishment dated 30.12.2024 and also the order withholding the salary of the petitioner for the period he remained under suspension which was also passed on 30.12.2024. 3. Learned Standing Counsel for the State has raised a preliminary objection regarding maintainability of this petition that the petitioner has alternative efficacious remedy to file appeal against the orders aforesaid. 4. Meeting the preliminary objection, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner though can challenge the order of punishment before the appellate authority but there is no appeal provided under the relevant rules to question the order by which the salary of the petitioner has been withheld for the period he has remained under suspension. It is further contended that since the petitoiner could not submit the reply to the show cause notice, the petitioner may be permitted to make reply to the show cause notice and authority should be directed to consider the same. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the records, in my considered view once the order of suspension has come to be finally passed the controversy cannot be reopened by this Court while exercising power under Article 226 of Constitution of India. In the event show cause notice is issued to the petitioner and he fails to submit reply, the statutory forum available is of appeal under the relevant rules and therefore, petitioner should avail that remedy at the first instance. In so far as the withholding of salary for the period petitioner remained under suspension is concerned though it may not be seen to be the punishment order but since this order has been passed with the punishment order it is said to be in the nature of punishment order. 6. In the circumstances therefore the petitioner has remedy to file appeal before the departmental appellate authority against the order withholding salary for the period petitioner had been under suspension. 7. Accordingly, I decline to grant indulgence in the matter at this stage. It is provided that in the event petitioner prefers departmental appeal against both the orders dated 30.12.2024 including the punishment order and order withholding salary within four weeks from today before the appellate authority, he shall proceed to decide the appeal against both the orders on merits within a further period of two months strictly adhering to the procedure prescribed for under the relevant rule and also in consonance with the principles of natural justice. 8. Needless to add, order to be passed by the appellate authority shall be reasoned and speaking one. 9. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this petition stands disposed of. Order Date :- 17.5.2025 Deepika Digitally signed by :- DEEPIKA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- DEEPIKA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad