Allowed

Satya Prakash Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC27 Sept 2023WRIA/16393/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, the petitioner complained of inordinate delay in concluding disciplinary proceedings against him. The High Court directed the authorities to pass a final decision within three months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to District Basic Education Officer, Mainpuri to take final decision in disciplinary proceedings pending against petitioner within three months.

Satya Prakash Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:187867

¶2

Court No. - 36

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16393 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Satya Prakash Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Awadh Narain Rai,Raghvendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Manvendra Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Manjive Shukla,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Respondent No.1 as well as Sri Manvendra Singh, learned counsel appearing for the Respondents No. 2 and 3.

¶7

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that services of the petitioner were placed under suspension vide order dated 28.12.2022 in contemplation of disciplinary proceedings. Thereafter, charge sheet was issued to the petitioner on 7.2.2023, to which petitioner submitted his reply on 11.3.2023. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has further submitted that since the date of submission of reply by the petitioner till date nothing has been done in the petitioner's matter and he is still continuing under suspension.

¶8

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has argued that noble method has been adopted by the District Basic Education Officer, Mainpuri to keep the petitioner under suspension and not to complete the inquiry.

¶9

On the other hand, Sri Manvendra Singh, learned counsel appearing for the Respondents No.2 and 3 has submitted that petitioner has already submitted reply to the charge sheet, therefore it would be in the fitness of things if a direction is issued by this court to the District Basic Education Officer, Mainpuri to complete the disciplinary proceedings pending against the petitioner and pass final order within a fixed time frame.

¶10

I have considered the rival submissions advanced by the learned counsels appearing for the parties and I find that charge sheet was issued to the petitioner on 7.2.2023, to which he has already submitted reply on 11.3.2023. Once the reply to the charge sheet has been filed by the petitioner, it was obligatory on the part of the respondents to complete the disciplinary

¶11

proceedings but they have failed to discharge their obligation.

¶12

In view of the aforesaid reasons, this writ petition is finally disposed of with direction to the District Basic Education Officer, Mainpuri to take final decision in the matter of disciplinary proceedings pending against the petitioner, within a period of three months from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order.

¶13

Order Date :- 27.9.2023 Salim

¶14

Digitally signed by :- SALIM PRAVEJ High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Satya Prakash Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satya Prakash Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smita Saran Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Hemlata Nagar Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Prasant Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ajeet Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Anish Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pradeep Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others