SURENDRA PRATAP SINGHversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND 4 OTHERS

                HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                           WRIT - A No. - 16001 of 2026

Surendra Pratap Singh
                                                                     .....Petitioner(s)
                                        Versus

State Of Uttar Pradesh And 4 Others
                                                                   .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)             : Radhey Shyam Singh, Saran Kumar
Counsel for Respondent(s)             : C.S.C., Hari Narayan Singh

Court No. - 52
                  HON'BLE MRS. MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for
the State-respondent nos.1 and 2 as well as Mr. Hari Narayan Singh,
learned counsel for respondent nos.3 to 5.

2. The instant writ petition has been filed with the following prayers:

"i. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature Mandamus commanding the
respondents to pay the petitioner's full salary and all other benefits for the period of
suspension i.e. from 03.09.2019 till his date of retirement i.e. on 24.11.2022, on which
the suspension order of the petitioner was revoked by the respondent no. 5 (BSA).
ii. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the
respondents to regularize the suspension period of the petitioner and to treat the
suspension period of the petitioner showing continuity of his services, without any
break in service.
iii. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature Mandamus commanding the
respondents to pay to the petitioner arrears of full salary for the suspension period
along with interest accruing on the date of reinstatement and his services i.e. on
24.11.2022 and further on his exoneration vide judgment and order dated 06.04.2024
passed by the Additional Sessions Judge IX, Aligarh in Case Crime No. 99/2019
under Section 498-A, 304-B, 323 IPC & 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Vijaygarh,
District - Aligarh
............"

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was
appointed as Assistant Teacher in Primary School on 01.05.2018. He
                                                         WRIA No. 16001 of 2026
                                2


further submits that the petitioner's wife committed suicide on
11/12.08.2019 for which an FIR was lodged on 12.08.2019 against the
petitioner and other family members under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 323
I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. He also submits that due
to the aforesaid FIR, the petitioner was sent to jail on 03.09.2019 and
thereafter he was placed under suspension on 03.09.2019. He further
contends that the petitioner was reinstated by order dated 24.11.2022 with
the stipulation that for payment of salary for the period wherein the
petitioner was in jail will be paid after final decision of the court in the
criminal case of the petitioner. The petitioner was finally acquitted by the
trial court on 06.04.2024 and the Government Appeal No.562 of 2024
(State of U.P. vs. Surendra Pratap @ Devkinandan And Another) has also
been dismissed by order dated 16.01.2025, however, the petitioner's full
salary for the period of suspension from 03.09.2019 till date of
reinstatement i.e. 24.11.2022 has not been paid to the petitioner. He
further contends that all the other benefits for which the petitioner is
entitled for are also not being paid to him despite the order dated
24.11.2022 passed by the concerned respondent that decision regarding
payment of salary will be taken after final decision in the criminal case
against the petitioner. In this regard, a detailed representation has been
placed by the petitioner before the authorities concerned but nothing has
been done till date.

4. On the basis of instructions which are passed on to the Court today and
are taken on record, learned counsel for respondent nos.3 to 5 submits that
the petitioner has not worked during the aforesaid period when he was in
jail, therefore, he is not entitled for salary, however, in case the petitioner
moves a fresh representation before the competent authority, the same
shall be considered and decided in accordance with law.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case but without
expressing any opinion on the merits of the case set up on behalf of the
petitioner, the present writ petition is disposed of by providing that the
petitioner may make fresh representation, ventilating all his grievances,
supported by such documents, as may be advised, before the respondent
no.5-District Basic Education Officer, Aligarh within three weeks from
today along with a certified copy of this order. On such representation
                                                                                           WRIA No. 16001 of 2026
                                                                   3


                                    being made, respondent no.5 shall make all endeavours to consider and
                                    decide the same, strictly in accordance with law, by means of a reasoned
                                    and speaking order, after giving proper opportunity of hearing to the
                                    parties concerned, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period
                                    of six weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order, if
                                    there is no legal impediment.



                                                                               (Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.)
                                    September 30, 2026
                                    K.N.




Digitally signed by :-
KALP NATH SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad