Sanjay Kumar Vyas vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Social Welfare Lko. and 5 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Sanjay Kumar Vyas vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Social Welfare Lko. and 5 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interim order: counter affidavit within four weeks; case to be listed fresh in the week commencing 30.03.2026; until further orders of the Court, operation of the impugned orders dated 06.11.2025 and 06.01.2026 shall remain stayed so far as they pertain to recovery from the petitioner.

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned orders of dismissal from service and initiation of recovery are sustainable where, as submitted, the sole charge reflects mere irregularity in procedure (transfer of SC/ST scholarship amounts into the Institution's account) and contains no allegation of embezzlement against the petitioner. +1 more

Court's answer

Prima facie, the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner have force and require consideration; accordingly, the opposite parties were granted four weeks' time to file counter affidavit (interim-stage observation; final merits left open).

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Writ-A No. 2274 of 2026 (Manish Mathur, J.), order dated February 25, 2026 — Sanjay Kumar Vyas v. State of U.P. thru Addl. Chief Secy., Deptt. of Social Welfare and others. Interim order in a writ petition challenging orders dated 06.11.2025 and 06.01.2026 dismissing the petitioner from service and initiating recovery of approximately Rs. 3.23 crores. Counsel for the petitioner pointed to the charge-sheet dated 13.06.2014, submitting that the only charge levelled was transfer of SC/ST students' scholarship amounts directly into the Institution's bank accounts instead of into the students' accounts — a mere irregularity of procedure with no allegation of embezzlement — and further that neither the inquiry report nor the documents sought had been supplied to the petitioner, and that no effective oral inquiry into his complicity was conducted. Finding these submissions prima facie to have force and require consideration, the Court granted the opposite parties four weeks to file counter affidavit, listed the matter fresh in the week commencing 30.03.2026, and directed that, until further orders, operation of the impugned orders shall remain stayed insofar as they pertain to recovery from the petitioner.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

WRIT - A No. - 2274 of 2026

Sanjay Kumar Vyas

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Social Welfare Lko. And 5 Others

.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Manish Jauhari, Shruti Sahu Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Raj Kumar Upadhyaya (R.K.Upadhyaya), S M Singh Royekwar

Court No. - 7

HON'BLE MANISH MATHUR, J.

Heard learned counsel for petitioner, learned State Counsel for opposite parties no.1 to 5 and Mr. Sumit Tahilawani, Advocate, holding brief on behalf of Mr. S.M. Singh Royekwar, learned counsel for opposite party no.6.

Petition has been filed challenging orders 06.11.2025 and 06.01.2026 whereby petitioner has been dismissed from service while initiating recovery of approximately Rs.3.23 crores.

Learned counsel for petitioner has adverted to the charge-sheet 13.06.2014 to submit that the only charge levelled against petitioner is of transferring the students scholarship amount pertaining to SC/ST Students directly into bank accounts of the Institution instead of transferring the same into the accounts of students. It is submitted that the aforesaid allegations merely reflect irregularity in procedure particularly there is no allegations levelled against petitioner or having embezzled the said amount. He has also adverted to the aspect that neither the inquiry report has ever been provided to petitioner nor the documents which were sought by him. He further submits that a perusal of impugned order will also make it evident that no oral inquiry worth the name has been conducted with regard to complicity of petitioner in the

WRIA No. 2274 of 2026

2

charges levelled against him.

Prima facie, submissions advanced by learned counsel for petitioner have force and require consideration for which opposite parties are granted four weeks' time to file counter affidavit.

List this case in the week commencing 30.03.2026, as fresh.

Until further orders of this Court, operation of impugned orders dated 06.11.2025 and 06.01.2026 so far as they pertain to recovery from petitioner shall remain stayed.

(Manish Mathur,J.)

February 25, 2026

Subodh/-

Digitally signed by :- SUBODH KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench