Badri Ram vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 15321 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:106591
 
Court No. - 38
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 7570 of 2023
 

 
Petitioner :- Badri Ram
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Atipriya Gautam,Jay Vishwanath Pandey,Sr. Advocate,Vinod Kumar Mishra
 
Counsel for Respondent :- CSC
 

 
Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

1. Heard Sri Vijay Gautam, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Vinod Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

2. The present petition has been filed seeking the following relief:-

"a) issue, a writ, in the nature of certiorari, quashing the impugned suspension & attachment order dated 05.03.2023 passed by the Respondent No.3, (enclosed as Annexure-1) to the Writ Petition.

b) Issue, a writ, order or direction, in the nature of mandamus, directing the Respondents, to reinstate the services of the petitioner and allow to join his duties as a Sub-Inspector, at District Aligarh with all consequential benefits and also to pay his salary."

3. It is the case of the petitioner that while the petitioner was working on the post of Sub-Inspector, he was suspended vide order dated 05.03.2023 on the basis of criminal case being Case Crime No.17 of 2023, under Section 343 IPC registered against the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that when the impugned suspension order was passed, at that time, preliminary inquiry is going and without any material against the petitioner, he was suspended and as such, the order impugned may be quashed. In support of his submission, learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon several judgments passed by this Court.

5. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel vehemently opposed the prayer as made in the petition and submits that suspension is not a punishment and suspension order has been passed in contemplation of inquiry.

6. The submission advanced by learned Standing Counsel seems to be forceful and the Court finds no good ground to interfere with the order impugned.

7. However, the petitioner is aggrieved with the order of suspension, he will be at liberty to prefer a detailed representation ventilating all his grievances before the authority who is higher than the authority who passed the order of suspension within 15 days from today. In case, such representation is filed within the stipulated period as fixed, the same shall be considered and decided by the authority concerned within a period of one month from the date of production of the representation along with a certified copy of this order before him.

8. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.

Order Date :- 16.5.2023

Vivek Kr.