Disposed¶20

Shanu Khan and 5 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Urban Development Nagar Vikas Anubhag Lko. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC23 Apr 2026WRIA/3730/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ-A 3730 of 2026; Allahabad High Court Lucknow Bench; Rajeev Singh J.; Shanu Khan and 5 others v. State of U.P.; termination of contractual employees engaged through outsourced agency; alleged booth level agents of Samajwadi Party; SDO Shahabad Hardoi order dated 24.12.2025; removal from service; recovery of remuneration; blacklisting of outsourced company stayed by writ court; production of complete record; District Magistrate Hardoi; interim directions; next hearing 8.5.2026.

What did the court decide?

No merits decision taken; interim directions issued: case listed for 8.5.2026; Sub Divisional Officer, Shahabad, Hardoi to appear with the complete record on the next date; order to be communicated to the District Magistrate, Hardoi for necessary compliance. ¶20

Shanu Khan and 5 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Urban Development Nagar Vikas Anubhag Lko. and 4 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶20

Issue for consideration

Whether the termination of the petitioners' contractual engagements, with direction for removal from service and recovery of remuneration, based on the Sub Divisional Officer, Shahabad, Hardoi's order dated 24.12.2025 alleging that the petitioners acted as booth level agents of the Samajwadi Party in an election, is sustainable.

¶12

Court's answer

The Sub Divisional Officer, Shahabad, Hardoi is directed to appear before the Court on the next date (8.5.2026) along with the complete record.

¶20

Ratio / Principle

The Office is directed to communicate this order to the District Magistrate, Hardoi for necessary compliance.

¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench (Rajeev Singh, J.) — interim order in Writ - A No. 3730 of 2026, Shanu Khan and 5 others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Urban Development Nagar Vikas Anubhag Lko. and 4 others. Petitioners, engaged through respondent no.5 (an outsourced agency) on contractual basis under the control of respondent nos. 2 & 3, challenge the termination of their contracts effected by respondent no.3 on the instructions of the Sub Divisional Officer, Shahabad, Hardoi (order dated 24.12.2025), which allegedly proceeded on the footing that in an election the petitioners worked as booth level agents of the Samajwadi Party, directing their removal from service forthwith and recovery of remuneration paid to them. Counsel for respondent no.3 informed the Court that the outsourced company had been blacklisted but that the blacklisting order stood stayed by the writ court (stay order annexed at page 58 of the petition). The Court made no merits ruling: it listed the case for 8.5.2026, directed the Sub Divisional Officer, Shahabad, Hardoi to appear on the next date with the complete record, and ordered the Office to communicate the order to the District Magistrate, Hardoi for necessary compliance.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

WRIT - A No. - 3730 of 2026

¶3

Shanu Khan and 5 others

¶4

…..Petitioner(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Urban Development Nagar Vikas Anubhag Lko. and 4 others

¶7

…..Respondent(s)

¶8

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Nitin Kumar Mishra, Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Manoj Kumar Misra

¶9

Court No. - 17

¶10

HON'BLE RAJEEV SINGH, J.

¶11

Heard Sri Nitin Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri P.K. Singh, learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel for the respondent no.1 & 4, Sri Manoj Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the respondent nos.2 & 3.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners were engaged through respondent no.5 by way of outsourced agency and appointed on contractual basis under the kind control of respondent nos.2 & 3. He further submits that contracts of the petitioners have been terminated by the respondent no.3 on the instructions of Sub Divisional Officer, Shahabad, Hardoi dated 24.12.2025, by which, it is alleged that in an election, petitioners were working as booth level agents of Samajwadi Party, therefore, petitioners shall be removed from the services, forthwith and remuneration paid to the petitioners shall also recover from them.

¶13

Learned counsel for the respondent no.3 informs that outsourced company was black listed but the said order was stayed by the writ court, i.e., annexed with the petition at page - 58.

¶14

¶15

WRIA No. - 3730 of 2026

¶16

The order dated 24.12.2025 passed by Sub Divisional Officer, Shahabad, Hardoi reads as under :-

¶17

¶18

WRIA No. - 3730 of 2026

¶19

List this case on 8.5.2026.

¶20

On the next date, Sub Divisional Officer, Shahabad, Hardoi shall appear before this Court alongwith the complete record.

¶21

Office is directed to communicate this order to District Magistrate, Hardoi for necessary compliance.

¶22

(Rajeev Singh,J.)

¶23

April 23, 2026 Gaurav

¶24

Digitally signed by :- GAURAV PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Shanu Khan and 5 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Urban Development Nagar Vikas Anubhag Lko. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shanu Khan and 5 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Urban Development Nagar Vikas Anubhag Lko. and 4 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

Saurabh Biswas vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Saroof @ Saroop vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and 4 Others

Sachin Verma and 17 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Basic Education Lko. and 4 Others

Sitaram and Another vs Director Rajya Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Bhavna Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Food and Civil Supply Lko. and 4 Others

Nitin Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Urban Development Deptt. U.P. Lko. and 3 Others