Allahabad High Court

BRIJ KISHOR SHARMAversusSTATE OF UP AND 4 OTHERS

Decided: 6 May 2026
Bench: PRAKASH PADIA

Holding

The writ petition is dismissed as not pressed because the requisites for a quo warranto writ are not satisfied.

Summary

Petitioner Brij Kishor Sharma filed a writ petition seeking a writ of quo warranto against the District Basic Education Officer, Agra, alleging that his suspension and termination were unjust. The court noted that the petitioner had previously filed a writ challenging his punishment, which remained pending, and that the present petition appeared to be filed to harass the respondent. The court referred to the precedent in Dr. Neetu Singh v. State of U.P., which held that a quo warranto can only be issued against a public office, a requirement absent in the present petition. Consequently, the petition was deemed not pressed and was dismissed. The court also barred the petitioner from filing any fresh writ petition on the same matter.

Issues considered

Whether a writ of quo warranto is maintainable against the respondent in the present facts
Whether the petition is pressed and therefore liable to be entertained

Subjects

quo warranto
public office
writ petition
dismissal
administrative law
termination of service
not pressed

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 6338 of 2026

Brij Kishor Sharma
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus

State Of Up And 4 Others
.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.

Court No. - 6
HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J.

1. The petitioner has preferred present writ petition inter-alia with the
prayer to issue a writ of quo warranto and the relief is sought against the
respondent no.4 at present working on the post of District Basic
Education Officer, Agra.

2. It appears from perusal of the record that on account of serious
allegations made against the petitioner, he was initially placed under
suspension and thereafter his services were terminated against which writ
petition filed by the petitioner is still pending consideration before this
Court. It further reveals that since no relief was granted to the petitioner in
the writ petition filed by him against the order of punishment by this
Court, the petitioner has chosen to file present writ petition only in order
to harass the respondent no.5.

3. The Division Bench of this Court in the case of Dr. Neetu Singh Vs.
State of U.P. through Secretary Medical Health and others reported in
2019 SCC OnLine AII 5871 has already held that writ of quo warranto
could only be issued against the public office, which fact is missing in the
present writ petition.

4. In view of the same, present writ petition is liable to be dismissed.

5. At this point of time, a prayer has been made by counsel for the
petitioner to dismiss present writ petition as not pressed.

6. Prayer made is allowed.
WRIA No. 6338 of 2026
2

7. The writ petition is dismissed as not pressed. It is made clear that no
liberty whatsoever has been given to the petitioner to file fresh writ
petition.

8. Registrar (Compliance) is directed to communicate copy of this order
to respondent no.5-Jitendra Kumar Gond, District Basic Education
Officer, District-Agra through CJM, Agra within a week.

(Prakash Padia,J.)
May 7, 2026
Pramod Tripathi

Digitally signed by :-
PRAKASH PADIA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…