SURENDRA PRATAP SINGH v. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND 4 OTHERS
WRIA/16001/2026 · 2026-09-29
Manju Rani Chauhan
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 9964 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 9964 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 16001 of 2026 Court No. - 52 HON'BLE MRS. MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondent nos.1 and 2 as well as Mr. Hari Narayan Singh, learned counsel for respondent nos.3 to 5. 2. The instant writ petition has been filed with the following prayers:
"i. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature Mandamus commanding the respondents to pay the petitioner's full salary and all other benefits for the period of suspension i.e. from 03.09.2019 till his date of retirement i.e. on 24.11.2022, on which the suspension order of the petitioner was revoked by the respondent no. 5 (BSA). ii. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents to regularize the suspension period of the petitioner and to treat the suspension period of the petitioner showing continuity of his services, without any break in service. iii. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature Mandamus commanding the respondents to pay to the petitioner arrears of full salary for the suspension period along with interest accruing on the date of reinstatement and his services i.e. on 24.11.2022 and further on his exoneration vide judgment and order dated 06.04.2024 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge IX, Aligarh in Case Crime No. 99/2019 under Section 498-A, 304-B, 323 IPC & 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Vijaygarh, District - Aligarh ............"
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher in Primary School on 01.05.2018. He Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Radhey Shyam Singh, Saran Kumar Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Hari Narayan Singh Surendra Pratap Singh .....Petitioner(s) State Of Uttar Pradesh And 4 Others .....Respondent(s)
further submits that the petitioner's wife committed suicide on 11/12.08.2019 for which an FIR was lodged on 12.08.2019 against the petitioner and other family members under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 323 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. He also submits that due to the aforesaid FIR, the petitioner was sent to jail on 03.09.2019 and thereafter he was placed under suspension on 03.09.2019.
He further contends that the petitioner was reinstated by order dated 24.11.2022 with the stipulation that for payment of salary for the period wherein the petitioner was in jail will be paid after final decision of the court in the criminal case of the petitioner. The petitioner was finally acquitted by the trial court on 06.04.2024 and the Government Appeal No.562 of 2024 (State of U.P. vs. Surendra Pratap @ Devkinandan And Another) has also been dismissed by order dated 16.01.2025, however, the petitioner's full salary for the period of suspension from 03.09.2019 till date of reinstatement i.e. 24.11.2022 has not been paid to the petitioner. He further contends that all the other benefits for which the petitioner is entitled for are also not being paid to him despite the order dated 24.11.2022 passed by the concerned respondent that decision regarding payment of salary will be taken after final decision in the criminal case against the petitioner. In this regard, a detailed representation has been placed by the petitioner before the authorities concerned but nothing has been done till date. 4. On the basis of instructions which are passed on to the Court today and are taken on record, learned counsel for respondent nos.3 to 5 submits that the petitioner has not worked during the aforesaid period when he was in jail, therefore, he is not entitled for salary, however, in case the petitioner moves a fresh representation before the competent authority, the same shall be considered and decided in accordance with law. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case set up on behalf of the petitioner, the present writ petition is disposed of by providing that the petitioner may make fresh representation, ventilating all his grievances, supported by such documents, as may be advised, before the respondent no.5-District Basic Education Officer, Aligarh within three weeks from today along with a certified copy of this order.
On such representation WRIA No. 16001 of 2026 2
being made, respondent no.5 shall make all endeavours to consider and decide the same, strictly in accordance with law, by means of a reasoned and speaking order, after giving proper opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment. September 30, 2026 K.N.
WRIA No. 16001 of 2026 3 (Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- KALP NATH SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- KALP NATH SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad