Allahabad High Court

ADITYA KUMARversusDISTRICT BASIC SHIKSHA ADHIKARI PILIBHIT AND 4 OTHERS

Decided: 5 May 2026
Bench: MANJU RANI CHAUHAN

Holding

The suspension order cannot be set aside at this stage; the departmental inquiry must be conducted, allowing the petitioner to defend himself.

Summary

The petitioner, Aditya Kumar, filed a writ petition challenging a suspension order dated 12‑02‑2026 issued by the District Basic Education Officer, Pilibhit, on the ground of alleged non‑performance of his duties as a Basic Education Officer (BLO). The petitioner sought quashing of the suspension and a direction that the authorities consider his reply to the notice within a stipulated period. The respondents contended that the suspension order was lawful and free of any infirmity. The Court observed that the charges against the petitioner are matters that should be examined during a departmental inquiry, where the petitioner will have the opportunity to present his defence. Consequently, the Court declined to set aside the suspension and directed that the departmental inquiry be initiated and concluded expeditiously, preferably within one month of the certified copy of the order. The petition was therefore disposed of with the said direction.

Issues considered

Whether the suspension order issued to the petitioner can be quashed by a writ petition before the completion of a departmental inquiry.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to a direction that his reply to the notice be considered before the suspension takes effect.

Subjects

suspension
departmental inquiry
public service
writ petition
administrative law
due process

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 6713 of 2026

Aditya Kumar
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus

District Basic Shiksha Adhikari Pilibhit And 4
Others .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Arun Kumar Verma, Krishna Mohan
Singh
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Shashi Kant Srivastava

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

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Shashi Kant Srivastava,
learned counsel for the respondent-BSA and learned Standing Counsel for
the State-respondents and perused the records.

The present writ petition has been filed with a prayer to quash the
suspension order dated 12.02.2026 passed by respondent no.1, District
Basic Education Officer, Pilibhit, whereby the petitioner has been placed
under suspension on the ground of not performing the duty of BLO.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has confined his prayer to the extent
that the petitioner has submitted a reply to the notice served upon him.
Therefore, a direction may be issued to the authorities to conclude the
inquiry after considering the petitioner's reply within a stipulated period.

Learned counsel for the respondents-BSA submits that there is no
illegality or infirmity in the impugned order.

This Court is of the considered opinion that the charges so levelled
against the petitioner cannot be examined at this stage, inasmuch as the
explanation and documents relied upon by the petitioner can be a defence
in the departmental inquiry, as during departmental inquiry, the petitioner
will have ample opportunity to prove his innocence.

In view of the aforesaid, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction
that the departmental inquiry be initiated against the petitioner and
WRIA No. 6713 of 2026
2

brought to its logical end, strictly in accordance with law, at the earliest
possible preferably within a period of one month from the date of
production of a certified copy of this order before the disciplinary
authority. The petitioner shall cooperate in the inquiry.

(Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.)
May 6, 2026
Jitendra/-

Digitally signed by :-
JITENDRA KUMAR YADAV
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…