Allahabad High Court
RAKESH KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- DINESH PATHAK
Holding
The writ petition is dismissed as misconceived and devoid of merit.
Summary
Rakesh Kumar, a Junior Engineer in the Uttar Pradesh Electricity Distribution Division, filed a writ petition challenging his suspension dated 25‑09‑2025. He contended that the Superintending Engineer lacked jurisdiction to suspend him and that no inquiry report had been filed. The respondents argued that the jurisdiction issue was settled by a coordinate bench decision in Praveen Kumar Pandey v. U.P. Power Corporation Ltd. (Writ‑A No. 6111 of 2026) and that the inquiry report had already been submitted on 28‑04‑2026. The Court examined these submissions and found them without merit, noting the precedent on jurisdiction and the existence of the inquiry report. Consequently, the petition was held to be misconceived and was dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether the Superintending Engineer had jurisdiction to suspend the petitioner.
- Whether the suspension was invalid due to the non‑submission of an inquiry report.
Subjects
- suspension
- jurisdiction
- inquiry report
- electricity department
- service law
- writ petition
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 6660 of 2026
Rakesh Kumar
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 4 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Om Prakash Singh
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Devesh Vikram
Court No. - 33
HON'BLE DINESH PATHAK, J.
1. Heard Sri Om Prakash Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri
Devesh Vikram, learned counsel for respondent nos. 2 to 5.
2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 25.09.2025, whereby the he
has been suspended.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was
appointed to the post of Junior Engineer at 33/11 K.V. Electricity sub-centre
under the Electricity Distribution Division, Padrauna, District
Kushinagar. The Superintending Engineer (respondent no. 4), vide order
dated 25.09.2025, placed the petitioner under suspension and attached him,
during the period of suspension, with Vidyut Vitran Khand, Sevarahi,
Kushinagar. It is further submitted, while assailing the suspension order
dated 25.09.2025, that the Superintending Engineer has no jurisdiction to
suspend the petitioner and, till date, no inquiry report has been submitted by
the Inquiry Officer.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent nos. 2 to 5 contends that the
issue with regard to the jurisdiction of the Superintending Engineer stands
settled by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide judgement and order dated
29.04.2026 passed in Writ-A No. 6111 of 2026 (Praveen Kumar Pandey Vs.
U.P. Power Corporation Ltd. And 3 Others). So far as the inquiry report is
concerned, he submits that the Inquiry Officer has already submitted his
report on 28.04.2026.
5. In this conspectus, as above, the first submission advanced by learned
counsel for the petitioner, with regard to the jurisdiction of the
WRIA No. 6660 of 2026
2
Superintending Engineer has no substance in view of the judgement and
order dated 29.04.2026 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in the
Praveen Kumar Pandey (supra). So far as the second submission regarding
non-submission of the inquiry report is concerned, it transpires that the
Inquiry Officer has already submitted the inquiry report on 28.04.2026.
6. In view of the above, the submissions advanced by learned counsel for
the petitioner are devoid of substance and liable to be rejected.
7. As such, the instant writ petition, being misconceived and devoid of
merits, is dismissed.
May 5, 2026
vkg
(Dinesh Pathak,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
VINOD KUMAR GOSWAMI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…