Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:23053 Court No. - 5 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1619 of 2023 Petitioner :- Satendra Pratap Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Syed Mohammad Abbas Abdy Counsel for Respondent :- Abhishek Srivastava,C.S.C.,Kartikeya Saran,Kaushalendra Nath Singh Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J. 1. Heard Shri Syed Mohammad Abbas Abdy, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondent No. 1 and Ms. Kritika Sinha, learned counsel holding brief of Shri Abhishek Srivastava, learned counsel on behalf of the respondent No. 2. 2. Petitioner has assailed the impugned order dated 25.06.2022 passed by the respondent No. 3, order dated 08.07.2022 passed by the respondent No. 4 as well as the order dated 09.11.2022 passed by the respondent No. 2 rejecting his appeal. 3. The only submission raised by Shri Syed Mohammad Abbas Abdy, learned counsel for the petitioner is that the authorities did not adopt the procedure known to law while dispensing with his services. The petitioner was not given an opportunity to examine any departmental witnesses. In fact no departmental witness was produced before the Enquiry Officer. 4. Ms. Kritika Sinha, learned counsel holding brief of Shri Abhishek Srivastava, learned counsel on behalf of the respondent No. 2 has fairly called attention to the averments in the counter affidavit which admits to the fact that no departmental witness was examined in the enquiry proceedings. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 6. The following facts are established from the record and upon exchange of pleadings. 7. The departmental witnesses were not produced before the Enquiry Officer to bring home the charges against the petitioner. The petitioner was hence never given an opportunity to examine the said witnesses. 8. In the facts of this case, the introduction of the departmental witnesses was imperative for proving the charges against the petitioner as per applicable standards of evidence in the departmental enquiry proceedings. 9. The enquiry proceedings are vitiated and hence the impugned orders cannot be sustained. The order of the appellate authority fares no better, inasmuch as, it fails to redeem the illegality committed by the impugned order of dismissal. 10. In this wake, the impugned order dated 25.06.2022 passed by the respondent No. 3, order dated 08.07.2022 passed by the respondent No. 4 as well as the order dated 09.11.2022 passed by the respondent No. 2 are liable to be set aside and are set aside. 11. The matter is remitted to the respondents authority with the following directions:- i) The petitioner shall be given list of departmental witnesses who are proposed to be examined and also provided with copies of adverse materials which are to be relied upon against him. ii) The Enquiry Officer shall set specific dates for the enquiry proceedings and intimate the same to the petitioner in advance thereof. iii) The department shall produce relevant departmental witnesses in the enquiry proceedings. The petitioner shall be given an opportunity to cross-examine the said witnesses. iv) The petitioner shall cooperate in the enquiry proceedings. v) The enquiry proceedings shall be concluded within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 12. During the pendency of the enquiry proceedings, it shall be open to the respondents to suspend the petitioner immediately after reinstating him upon receipt of a copy of this order and thereafter proceed with the enquiry. 13. All other dues and entitlements of the petitioner shall be determined after the result of the ennqiry proceedings. 14. Writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated above. Order Date :- 18.2.2025 Jaswant Digitally signed by :- JASWANT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad