Jai Kesh Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Basic Edu. Lko and 5 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Jai Kesh Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Basic Edu. Lko and 5 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition disposed of (no reinstatement ordered): liberty given to petitioner to move a representation against the suspension order before the District Basic Education Officer within one week; such representation to be considered sympathetically by a reasoned and speaking order and communicated to the petitioner.

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition seeking quashing of the order dated 16.04.2026 (suspension) passed by Opposite Party No.2 and reinstatement of the petitioner in service should be entertained when a charge-sheet has been issued and a disciplinary proceeding is pending.

Court's answer

The writ petition is disposed of, with liberty to the petitioner to move a representation against the suspension order before the District Basic Education Officer within one week.

Ratio / Principle

If a representation is moved, it shall be considered sympathetically by a reasoned and speaking order, and the said order shall be communicated to the petitioner.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) [Rajeev Singh, J.]; Writ - A No. 4668 of 2026; decided 19.05.2026. The petitioner, who had earlier complained of irregularities in mid-day meal distribution against the then Incharge Head Master (Mr. Sanjeev Singh, representative of village pradhan Shyam Narayan Yadav) and whose consequent disciplinary proceeding had been dropped on 29.08.2024, was the subject of an impugned order dated 16.04.2026 passed by Opposite Party No.2 (suspension), stated by counsel to rest on a whatsapp-group message characterised as misconduct; the petitioner had tendered apology. Counsel sought certiorari quashing the order and mandamus for reinstatement with regular salary; respondents, through written instructions of the District Basic Education Officer, Ambedkar Nagar, showed that a charge-sheet had been issued and a disciplinary proceeding initiated, requiring no interference. Held: the writ petition was disposed of, granting liberty to the petitioner to move a representation against the suspension order before the District Basic Education Officer within one week; any such representation is to be considered sympathetically by a reasoned and speaking order, which is then to be communicated to the petitioner. No statutory provision or precedent was cited; the court itself decided only the mode of disposal, leaving the merits of the suspension/disciplinary proceeding to the competent authority.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

WRIT - A No. - 4668 of 2026

Jai Kesh Singh

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Basic Edu. Lko And 5 Others .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Shobh Nath Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Prashant Kumar Singh

Court No. - 17

HON'BLE RAJEEV SINGH, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Sudhir Kumar Singh, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent nos.1 & 3 and Sri Prashant Kumar Singh, learned counsel for respondent nos.2, 4, 5 & 6.

This petition has been filed with the following prayer:-

"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of CERTIORARI thereby quashing the impugned order dated 16.04.2026 passed by the Opposite Party No.2, as contained in Annexure No.1 to this writ petition.

(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS thereby commanding and directing the Opposite Parties to reinstate the petitioner in service, after revoking his suspension and pay him regular salary, as and when it falls due."

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier, the petitioner made a complaint about some irregularities in the distribution of mid-daymeal against Mr. Sanjeev Singh, the then Incharge Head Master and representative of village pradhan, namely, Shyam Narayan Yadav, as a result, all the senior officers were annoyed. The allegations in the said complaint were very strong, even then, disciplinary proceeding was initiated against the petitioner, but the same was dropped on 29.08.2024. Thereafter, only with the intention to harass the petitioner, the impugned suspension order was passed on the ground that the petitioner wrote a message on whatsapp group, which was in the category of misconduct.

WRIA No. 4668 of 2026

2

He further submits that the petitioner was being harassed by Block Education Officer as some massage was written on the whatsapp group, but he has tendered his apology. Thus, the submission is that as the petitioner has already tendered his apology, the proceedings may be dropped.

Sri Prashant Kumar Singh has placed written instructions duly signed by Mr. Shailesh Kumar Patel, District Basic Education Officer, Ambedkar Nagar, which are taken on record.

Sri Prashant Kumar Singh submits that charge-sheet has already been issued and disciplinary proceeding has been initiated, hence, no interference is required.

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, the present writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to move representation against the suspension order before the District Basic Education Officer within a period of one week from today. In case any representation is moved, same shall be considered, sympathetically, by a reasoned and speaking order, and thereafter the said order be communicated to the petitioner.

(Rajeev Singh,J.)

May 19, 2026

Arpan

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