Ambikesh Kumar Tripathi vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:103809

Court No. - 52 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 8348 of 2025 Petitioner :- Ambikesh Kumar Tripathi Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Devendra Kumar Tiwari,Dinesh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Manvendra Singh

¶3

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶4

Heard Mr. Dinesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Manvendra Singh, learned counsel for the respondent nos.3 to 5 and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

¶5

This writ petition has been filed inter-alia for the following reliefs:-

¶6

"i) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned suspension order dated 31.05.2025 (Annexure No.05 to the writ petition) passed by the respondent No.04/District Basic Education Officer, Distrit Mahoba.

¶7

ii) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding to the respondent no.04/District Basic Education Officer, District-Mahoba to permit the petitioner to teach the petitioner in Primary School, Chitaiya, Block Kabraee, District-Mahoba as well as to pay the salary.

¶8

iii) Issue any suitable other or further writ order or direction as this Hon'ble Court deem fit and proper, in favour of the petitioner, so justice may be done.

¶9

iv) To award the cost of the writ petition in favour of the petitioner."

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed on 29.08.2009 as an Assistant Teacher in Primary School, Gangarampur, Hathgaon, Fatehpur and performed his service upto 17.07.2013. Subsequently, in the year 2013, the petitioner was transferred to Primary School, Dharaun, Block Kabrai, Mahoba and performed his service to the said school upto February, 2014. He was again transferred to Primary School Atrar, Block Kabraee, Mahoba and performed his service upto 2021. Subsequently, the petitioner was again transferred in the year 2021 to Primary School, Chitaiya, Block-Kabrai, Mahoba and performed his service till date. Thereafter, a complaint dated 01.04.2025 has been moved by respondent no.6 before the District Magistrate, District Mahoba in respect of transfer of the petitioner to another primary school on the bogus and absurd grounds. On the same

¶11

day, the District Magistrate, Mahoba, on the said complaint dated 01.04.2025 directed the respondent no.4 for taking appropriate action against the petitioner. Subsequently, vide order dated 31.05.2025 passed by respondent no.4, the petitioner was placed under suspension and attached to Primary School, Sijwaha, Block Kabrai, Mahoba.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the respondent no.4 without considering the reply submitted by the petitioner as well as the guidelines issued by respondent no.2 passed the suspension order dated 31.05.2025 against the petitioner. The impugned suspension order dated 31.05.2025 is illegal, unjust and improper, hence the same is liable to be quashed.

¶13

Per contra, learned Standing Counsel as well as counsel for the respondent nos.3 to 5 submit that the charges levelled against the petitioner are of a serious in nautre so as to award major punishment. There is every apprehension that the petitioner can tamper the evidence against him.

¶14

Various facts and circumstances have been pleaded on behalf of the petitioner in the present writ petition for challenging the order of suspension. The charges so levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature, but the same are disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner and in that regard reliance has been placed upon various documents brought on record.

¶15

This Court is of the considered opinion that the charges so levelled against the petitioner cannot be examined at this stage, inasmuch as the explanation and documents relied upon by the petitioner can be a defence in the departmental inquiry, as during departmental inquiry, the petitioner will have ample opportunity to prove his innocence.

¶16

In view of the aforesaid, with consent of parties, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction that the departmental inquiry be initiated against the petitioner and brought to its logical end, strictly in accordance with law, after giving opportunity of hearing to all the parties including respondent no.6, at the earliest possible preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order before the disciplinary authority.

¶17

Order Date :- 3.7.2025 Jitendra/-

¶18

Digitally signed by :- JITENDRA KUMAR YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ambikesh Kumar Tripathi v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ambikesh Kumar Tripathi v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Suneeta Dwivedi vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sudarshan Singh and 7 Others vs State of Uttar Pradesh and 3 Others

Ajeet Singh vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Smt. Rashmi vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Devendra Kumar vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Dileep Kumar Yadav and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and 2 Others