Allahabad High Court
Mukesh Kumar vs State Of U.P. And 6 Others on 3 July, 2025
Author: Saurabh Shyam Shamshery
Bench: Saurabh Shyam Shamshery
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:103201
Court No. - 5
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 7641 of 2025
Petitioner :- Mukesh Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Mani Shanker Pandey,Rama Nand Shukla
Counsel for Respondent :- Abhishek Srivastava,Brajesh Pratap Singh,C.S.C.
Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.
1. Heard Sri M.S. Pandey, learned counsel for petitioner, Sri Abhishek Srivastava, Advocate for Respondents-2 to 4 and Sri Brajesh Pratap Singh, Advocate for Respondents-5 and 6.
2. This is second round of litigation. Petitioner has earlier suffered with a punishment, however, upon challenge it was quashed in a writ petition filed by petitioner vide order dated 05.01.2024. For reference the said order is reproduced hereinafter:
?1. Rejoinder affidavit filed today is taken on record.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned standing counsel for the State-respondents, Sri Abhishek Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 2 & 3 and Sri Brajesh Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 4 to 6.
3. Present writ petition has been filed with the following prayer:
"(i) Issue writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 03.10.2023 passed by the respondent no. 3 Chairman, U.P. Power Corporation Ltd, 14-Ashok Marg, Shakti Bhawan, Lucknow and order dated 7.6.2023 passed by the respondent No. 4, Managing Director, U.P. Power Corporation Ltd. 14-Ashok Marg, Shakti Bhawan, Lucknow.
(ii) Issue writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to treat the petitioner is in active service from the date of dismissal from the service dated 7.6.2023 and the respondents be also commanded to pay arrears of salary since 7.6.2023 upto disposal of the writ petition alongwith all consequential benefits."
4 Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that during the course of inquiry, neither any inquiry was conducted, nor any witness was produced to prove the charges against the petitioner. He also submitted that this fact has not been disputed in the counter affidavit filed by respondent Nos. 2 & 3. He next submitted that the same issue arising out of same matter was before this Court in Writ A No. 12991 of 2023: Suresh Babu Vs. State of U.P. and others, which was allowed vide judgment and order dated 19.10.2023 on the same ground quashing the impugned order with liberty to conduct fresh inquiry.
5. Sri Sri Abhishek Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 2 & 3 could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
6. I have perused the judgment and order dated 19.10.2023 of this Court passed in the matter of Suresh Babu(supra). Relevant paragraphs of the said judgment are quoted hereinbelow:
"23. In the result, this petition succeeds and is allowed. The impugned order dated 07.06.2023 passed by the Managing Director, Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Limited, Lucknow is hereby quashed. The respondents are ordered to reinstate the petitioner in service forthwith, and pay him current salary from the date of this judgment. If, however, the respondents choose to place the petitioner again under suspension in view of the liberty hereinafter indicated, the petitioner shall be paid his subsistence allowance regularly. The respondents shall be at liberty to undertake inquiry afresh in the matter, on the basis of the charge-sheet, already issued. The respondents in that event will proceed, bearing in mind the guidance in this judgment. If the respondents elect to proceed against the petitioner as per liberty given, it would be open to the respondents either to reinstate the petitioner, assigning him duties or not, but paying salary to him, or place him under suspension pending the inquiry to be held afresh. The question of payment of back-wages shall depend upon the outcome of the inquiry and the decision taken by the respondents in the proceedings, if they elect to pursue such proceedings. It is also ordered that if fresh proceedings are taken, the same shall be concluded expeditiously, wherein the petitioner shall cooperate. There shall be no order as to costs.
24. Let the original records be handed over to Mr. Abhishek Srivastava, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the U.P. Power Corporation for their onward transmission to the respondents. "
7. Under such facts and circumstances of the case, petition succeeds and is allowed in terms of judgment and order of this Court dated 19.10.2023 passed in Suresh Babu(supra). Orders dated 03.10.2023 and 07.06.2023 are hereby quashed.
8. No order as to costs.?
3. In pursuance of above order, Respondent-Power Corporation passed order dated 04.04.2024 whereby petitioner was reinstated and again put under suspension and a fresh inquiry was initiated.
4. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that even thereafter inquiry has not been concluded and petitioner is still under suspension. Learned counsel also referred documents annexed alongwith this writ petition that petitioner has already submitted reply and he is cooperating with Inquiry Officer.
5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for respondents submits that petitioner is repeatedly asking time and has not appeared in person when he was called.
6. I have considered the above submissions and perused the material available on record.
7. Fresh inquiry is pending for last more than one year. It is the case of petitioner that he has already filed his reply and submits that inquiry can be concluded on basis of said reply and he will appear if called for personal hearing.
8. In aforesaid circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with observation that petitioner shall appear before Inquiry Officer on 17th July, 2025 at 10.00 AM to present his case in person and thereafter inquiry shall be concluded within four weeks. In case of default, petitioner will be at liberty to avail legally permissible remedy.
Order Date :- 3.7.2025
AK
