Disposed

Satendra Kumar v. U.P.Power Corporation Limited and 3 Others

Allahabad HC12 Dec 2023WRIA/18930/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged suspension due to protracted pending disciplinary proceedings. Court ordered inquiry and disciplinary matter to conclude within one month, directed payment of enhanced subsistence allowance with arrears, and required petitioner to cooperate.

What did the court decide?

Inquiry to conclude within one month; enhanced subsistence allowance with arrears; no requirement for non-alternative engagement certificate.

Satendra Kumar Vs U.P.Power Corporation Limited and… — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:235428

¶2

Court No. - 33

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 18930 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Satendra Kumar Respondent :- U.P. Power Corporation Limited and others Counsel for Petitioner :- Prem Narayan Tiwari, Sanjiv Kumar Dwivedi Counsel for Respondent :- Kartikeya Saran

¶5

Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.

¶6

Heard Mr. Prem Narayan Tiwari, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Vinayak Ranjan, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Kartikeya Saran, learned Counsel for respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4.

¶7

The petitioner has been suspended on charges of embezzlement etc. vide order dated 13.10.2021 and disciplinary proceedings are pending against him. The grievance of the petitioner is that suspension order was essentially bad, and if not bad essentially, with the passage of time, it has become bad. It has become bad, because the disciplinary proceedings have not been concluded so far.

¶8

Mr. Vinayak Ranjan states that inquiry proceedings shall be concluded within a month.

¶9

In the circumstances, it is ordered that inquiry proceedings shall be concluded within a month of date, and that means that not only the inquiry, but also the disciplinary proceedings shall be disposed of, passing whatever orders the respondents find just to pass. The petitioner shall be paid subsistence allowance at the enhanced rate, together with arrears, since the suspension has been protracted. The subsistence allowance shall be paid regularly, without asking

¶10

the petitioner to furnish a non-alternative engagement certificate.

¶11

It is further directed that the petitioner shall cooperate with the inquiry proceedings and not delay proceedings. In the event, the inquiry proceedings, including the entire disciplinary matter, are not decided within a period of one month, it will be open to the petitioner to approach this Court again, assailing his suspension on ground of delay.

¶12

The petition stands disposed of in terms of the orders aforesaid.

¶13

Order Date :- 12.12.2023 I. Batabyal

¶14

Digitally signed by :- ISHAN BATABYAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Satendra Kumar v. U.P.Power Corporation Limited and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satendra Kumar v. U.P.Power Corporation Limited and 3 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

Raj Kapoor Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ashok Kumar Khare Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Rakesh Kumar Bhatnagar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Arvind Singh Yadav @ Arvind Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Ratan Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Anil Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others