Santosh Yadav vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 22454 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 34
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13246 of 2021
 

 
Petitioner :- Santosh Yadav
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Prabhakar Awasthi,Noor Ahmed,Surjit Kumar
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State.

Despite time being granted by this Court on 30.09.2021, no counter affidavit has been filed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that the present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 12.2.2021 whereby the services of the petitioner have been terminated taking recourse to Rule 8(2)(b) of U.P. Police Officers and Sub-ordinate Rank (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991.

He argues that the same order was challenged by a person who is similarly placed by filing Writ - A No.13429 of 2021 (Alok Bhargav v. State of U.P. 7 Ors.) and the said writ petition proceeded to quash the order dated 12.2.2021 insofar as it relates to the petitioner therein. The said judgment places reliance on another judgment of this Court in the case of Afjal Khan v. State of U.P. & Ors.; 2015 (2) ADJ 444.

It is also argued that in yet another case being Writ - A No.317 of 2022 (Dharmendra Prasad Yadav v. State of U.P. & Ors.), this Court was pleased to quash the order of dismissal dated 21.1.2021 passed in respect of one of the co-accused Dharmendra Prasad Yadav.

He argues that as the order is common and has been quashed by this Court holding that there was no material existing on record to show that it was reasonable or practical to hold a departmental inquiry, which is a sine-qua-non for non-exercising of power under Rule 8(2)(b) of the 1991 Rules, the impugned order in the present case should also be quashed.

Considering the submissions made at the bar and the fact that in the cases of two persons against whom the same order was passed had succeeded before this Court, I do not have any reason to take a view different from the one taken by this Court in the case Alok Bhargav (supra) and the one taken by this Court in the case of Dharmendra Prasad Yadav (supra), as such, on the same ground and analogy, following the judgment in the case of Afjal Khan (supra), the writ petition is allowed.

Impugned order 30.09.2021 is set aside.

The matter is remanded giving liberty to the respondents to proceed to pass a fresh order, if so advised, in accordance with law.

Order Date :- 22.12.2022

Shafique