This writ petition challenges the suspension and charge sheet against a respondent official. The High Court stayed the impugned orders and called for a counter affidavit to explain the material basis for alleging manipulation of records in 1984.
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. - 6
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 9045 of 2024
Petitioner :- Harish Chandra
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Revenue Lko. And 11 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Savitra Vardhan Singh,Umesh Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sharad Tewari
Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.
granted in 1984 that the said persons were shown to be the beneficiaries on account of the acquisition of land by the State Government as the names were mentioned in the revenue records against the acquired lands.
petitioner was not even posted.
(Alok Mathur, J.)
Order Date :- 7.11.2024 Virendra
Digitally signed by :- VIRENDRA KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the disciplinary proceedings are sustainable given the initiation of fresh charges for the same episode after a prior punishment.
Whether the suspension and charge sheet can be stayed pending explanation from the respondents.
How the material regarding manipulation of revenue records in 1984 needs to be explained before concluding petitioner responsibility.
Harish Chandra
State Of U.P.
Alok Mathur
As recorded by the court registry
7 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
