Dismissed¶32

Manoj Kumar Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Co-Operative Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC7 Apr 2026WRIA/3395/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Suspension order; quashing; reinstatement; U.P. Cooperative Federation Ltd.; Managing Director; PCF Balrampur; Helper/Guard; disciplinary proceeding; charge sheet; reply dated 03.10.2024; stoppage of 3 increments; punishment order dated 13.04.2026; writ dismissed as having lost efficacy; liberty to challenge punishment order; affidavit of Mohd. Anwar, Assistant Manager; interim order 07.04.2026; High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench; Rajeev Singh, J.; decided 15.04.2026; WRIT - A No. - 3395 of 2026.

What did the court decide?

None against the suspension order; liberty left to the petitioner to avail appropriate remedy against the punishment order dated 13.04.2026, if he so chooses. ¶32

Manoj Kumar Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Co-Operative Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

WRIT - A No. - 3395 of 2026

Manoj Kumar Verma

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Lko. And 3 Others	Co-Operative .....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Santosh Kumar Tripathi, Paritosh Shukla
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: C.S.C., Shubhi Sharma, Sunil Sharma
Court No.- 17

¶7

HON'BLE RAJEEV SINGH, J.

¶8

Vakalatnama filed by Birendra Prasad Singh, Advocate on behalf of respondent no. 3 is taken on record.

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Dr. Udayveer Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the respondent no. 1, Shri Birendra Prasad Singh and Shri Shubhi Sharma, learned counsel appearing for respondent nos. 2 to 4.

¶10

This petition has been filed for quashing the suspension order dated 29.12.2012 bearing Letter No. PCF/Prasha/3260 passed by respondent no. 2. A further prayer of mandamus has been sought to direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in service and to grant him consequential benefits including the salary and other dues.

¶11

On 07.04.2026, following order was passed.

¶12

"1. Ms. Shubhi Sharma, Advocate has filed power on behalf of the respondent nos.2, 3 and 4, which is taken on record.

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Dr. Uday Veer Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent no.1 and Ms. Surbhi Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent nos.2 to 4.

¶14

This petition has been filed with the following prayer:-

¶15

"(i) Issue a Writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the

¶16

WRIA No. 3395 of 2026

¶17

¶18

impugned suspension order dated 29/12/2022 bearing Letter No. PCF/Prasha/3260 passed by the Respondent No. 2 i.e. Managing Director (as contained in Annexure-1);

¶19

(ii) Issue a Writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the Respondent authorities to reinstate the Petitioner into the service (on the post of Helper/Guard at PCF, District Balrampur) ignoring the impugned suspension order dated 29/12/2022 as well as further proceedings, and grant forthwith with all the consequential benefits including the salary and earlier dues and arrears."

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was placed under suspension vide order dated 29.12.2022, but till today, disciplinary proceeding has not been concluded, hence, suspension order may be kept in abeyance.

¶21

It is evident from the record that notice for respondent nos.2 to 4 was received by Sri Sunil Sharma on 24.03.2026 and today power is filed by Ms. Shubhi Sharma on behalf of respondent nos.2 to 4.

¶22

Today, no written instructions duly signed by Managing Director is placed before this Court.

¶23

List this case on 15.04.2026 at 11:30 A.M.

¶24

By the next date, complete and comprehensive written instructions duly signed by Managing Director of U.P. Cooperative Federation Ltd. be placed before this Court.

¶25

Office is directed to show the name of Ms. Shubhi Sharma, Advocate as the counsel for the respondent nos.2 to 4 in the cause list.

¶26

On the next date, any responsible officer shall appear in person before this Court alongwith complete record related to disciplinary proceeding."

¶27

In pursuance of the aforesaid order, affidavit filed by respondent nos. 2 to 4 duly sworn by Mohd. Anwar, Assistant Manager, U.P. Cooperative Federation Ltd., Lucknow is taken on record.

¶28

The aforesaid affidavit reveals that a show cause notice along with charge sheet was given to the petitioner, reply of which, was submitted by him on 03.10.2024. Thereafter, disciplinary authority passed the order dated 13.04.2026, whereby stopping 3 increments of the petitioner, he has been allowed to resume the duties at Regional Officer, Gorakhpur.

¶29

Once the final punishment order has already been passed, therefore, this Court is of the view that the present petition has lost

¶30

WRIA No. 3395 of 2026

¶31

¶32

its efficacy and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.

¶33

However, it is open to the petitioner to avail appropriate remedy against the punishment order, if he so chooses.

¶34

(Rajeev Singh,J.)

¶35

April 15, 2026

¶36

VKS

¶37

Digitally signed by :- VIVEK KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Manoj Kumar Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Co-Operative Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manoj Kumar Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Co-Operative Deptt. Lko. and 3 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

Vinod Kumar Trivedi vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Krishi Vipran and Videsh Vyapar Anubhag Lko. and 3 Others

Ram Kumar and 5 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Agri. Marketing and Foreign Trade Lko. and 2 Others

Jamuna Devi @ Yamuna Devi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko.

Ramraj Singh and Another vs Director Rajya Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad U.P. Lko. and 2 Others

Niraj Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Rajesh Bothra vs Central Bureau of Investigation Thru. SP and Head of Branch Lko