Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:87121 Court No. - 5 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 7270 of 2025 Petitioner :- Bajrang Prasad Maurya Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Niraj Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- Anuj Pratap Singh,C.S.C. Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J. Heard Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Niraj Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri Swapnil Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent nos.2, 3 and 4 and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by the appellate authority dated 05/06.02.2025 rejecting his appeal. The appeal has been rejected by the appellate authority on the footing that it was barred by limitation. The appellate authority in the impugned order notices that the disciplinary authority by order dated 11.01.2024 awarded censure entry along-with withholding one increment with permanent effect. The appeal was filed on 01.09.2024. Thereafter the order records that as per the Rule 11(4) of the Uttar Pradesh Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999, the period of limitation is ninety days. In this wake the appellate authority found that the appeal was filed after the period of limitation, and the appeal accordingly rejected. The petitioner had earlier approached this Court against the order passed by disciplinary authority dated 11.01.2024 by instituting Writ- A No.11727 of 2024, (Bajrang Prasad Maurya versus State of U.P. and 3 others). The aforesaid writ petition was disposed by judgement and order dated 07.08.2024. The operative portion of the directions issued by this Court are extracted hereunder :- "In view of the above, I decline to grant indulgence in the matter. However, it is provided that in the event petitioner prefers departmental appeal within a period of four weeks from today, the same shall be considered and disposed of on merits and in accordance with law as per the procedure prescribed for under the relevant rules by the appellate authority within a maximum period of three months. With the aforesaid observations and directions this petition stands disposed of." The petitioner field the memo of appeal along- with a copy of the order passed by this Court, in the period stipulated in the said order. This fact has not been disputed by Sri Swapnil Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent nos.2, 3 and 4. The appellate authority while passing the impugned order has neglected to consider the directions of this Court dated 07.08.2024 passed in Bajrang Prasad Maurya (supra). The appellate authority while passing the impugned order has failed to examine the controversy on merits in clear violation of the directions of this Court. The appellate authority is liable to be given one more chance to purge itself of possible contempt proceedings. In this wake the impugned order dated 05/06.02.2005 passed by the appellate authority is liable to be set aside and is set aside. The matter is remitted to respondent no.1 with the following directions :- I. The respondent no1. shall in compliance of the directions of this Court issued in the judgement dated 07.08.2024 rendered in Writ-A No.11727 of 2024, (Bajrang Prasad Maurya versus State of U.P. and 3 others) decide the appeal on merits. II. The respondent no.1 shall decide the appeal within a period of two month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order along-with copy of the order of earlier writ petition. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is allowed. Order Date :- 22.5.2025 I.A.Siddiqui Digitally signed by :- IMRAN AHMAD SIDDIQUI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad