Uttarakhand High Court

4 July vs State Of Uttarakhand & Others on 4 July, 2025

Author: Pankaj Purohit

Bench: Pankaj Purohit

                                                       2025:UHC:5720
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
     Writ Petition Service Single No. 1083 of 2025
                          04 July, 2025



Nagendra Singh

                                                        --Petitioner
                               Versus

State Of Uttarakhand & others


                                                    --Respondents

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Presence:-
Mr. Prashant Khanna, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Mr. N.K. Papnoi, learned Standing Counsel for the State.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.

By means of present writ petition, petitioner has put to challenge the order dated 29.05.2025 whereby the petitioner was put under suspension by the respondent no.3-District Education Officer (Basic) Bahadrabad, District Haridwar.

2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that on the similar ground petitioner was placed under suspension. The said suspension order was challenged by the petitioner by moving a Writ Petition (S/S) No.1615 of 2017, Nagendra Singh vs. State of Uttarakhand & others, which was allowed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide judgment and order dated 22.03.2018. It is further contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner cannot be placed under suspension again on the same ground.

2025:UHC:5720

3. I have perused the judgment and order dated 22.03.2018, where-from it is reflected that the suspension order was quashed mainly on the ground that the educational certificates of the petitioner were sent for verification to the Gorakhpur University and before verification, he was placed under suspension. Now, by the fresh suspension order, petitioner has been suspended for the reason that from the documents, it transpires that the date of birth of petitioner is 01.08.1965 and from perusal of the high school certificate, it is reflected that the petitioner has passed the High School Examination at the age of 12 years, which is highly doubtful, therefore, he was placed under suspension.

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record including the impugned order, this Court is of the view that there is no illegality in the suspension order dated 29.05.2025. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed in-limine.

5. Pending application, if any, stands disposed off accordingly.

(Pankaj Purohit, J.) 04.07.2025 AK