Petitioner assailed inquiry officer's order on charges of corruption and negligence. Court declined interference at present but directed inquiry to conclude within three months upon filing preliminary objections.
Petition disposed of; inquiry officer to conclude inquiry within three months after hearing petitioner on preliminary objections.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 33
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 21310 of 2022
Petitioner :- Akhilesh Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Santosh Kumar Tiwari,Santosh Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.
Heard Shri R. K. Ojha, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner alongwith Shri Santosh Yadav and the learned Standing Counsel for the Staterespondents.
By means of the instant petition, the petitioner assails the order dated 20.10.2022 issued by the inquiry ofÏcer.
Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that a charge-sheet has been served on the petitioner and two charges have been levelled against the petitioner: (i) that the petitioner while passing an order dated 07.02.2022 in proceedings under the UPCH Act 1953 on discharge of his duties as Consolidation OfÏcer had accepted illegal gratification for passing the order; (ii) the other charge is that the order passed under the proceedings of the UPCH Act, 1953, against which the litigating parties concerned have preferred an appeal and while passing the order the petitioner was negligent.
Submission of the learned Senior Counsel is that in so far as the first charge is concerned, even in the detailed preliminary inquiry, the said allegation could not be sustained against the petitioner. However, the petitioner cannot be charged with the second charge as there can be no negligence for passing a judicial order in exercise of powers under UPCH Act, especially when the parties concerned have already filed appeal against the said order.
Having considered the aforesaid submission and noticing the fact that the chargesheet has already
been served on the petitioner. At this stage, this Court is not inclined to interfere, however, leaving it open for the petitioner to file his detailed submission including the preliminary objections and in case if the same is raised, the same shall be considered and dealt with by the inquiry ofÏcer after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and conclude the inquiry within a period of three months.
With the aforesaid, the petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 8.2.2023 ank
Digitally signed by :- ALI NEWAZ KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the inquiry officer's order on the charge-sheet level.
Akhilesh Kumar
State Of U.P
Jaspreet Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
