BRAJ BHUSHANversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND 4 OTHERS

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                        WRIT - A No. - 7117 of 2026

Braj Bhushan
                                                            .....Petitioner(s)
                                   Versus

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

Counsel for Petitioner(s)                             :   Mohd Atif
Counsel for Respondent(s)                             :   C.S.C.

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

1. Heard Sri Anurag Khanna, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri
Mohd. Atif, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel
for the respondent-State and perused the records.

2. The order dated 18.04.2026 passed by the respondent no.2-District
Magistrate, Hapur by which petitioner was dismissed from service is
under challenge in the present writ petition.

3. Apart from various other arguements on merits, an objection has been
raised by learned Standing Counsel that against the aforesaid order
statutory alternative remedy is available to the petitioner to file an appeal
and thereafter a revision before the State Government as per provisions
contained in U.P. Government Service (Discipline & Appeals), Rules
1999.

4. In response to the same, it is argued by learned Senior Counsel that
order impugned is vitiated by gross violation of principles of natural
justice, in as much as no effective opportunity of hearing was afforded to
the petitioner, no oral enquiry was conducted, no witnesses were
examined and no opportunity of cross-examination was provided, thereby
rendering the entire disciplinary proceedings null and void. The
disciplinary proceedings stand vitiated on account of non compliance with
the mandatory provisions of Rule 7(5) of the Uttar Pradesh Government
Servants (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999 as no relied upon
documents, witness lists, or statements were ever supplied to the
petitioner despite repeated requests, thereby depriving him of a fair
                                                                                          WRIA No. 7117 of 2026
                                                                  2


                                    opportunity to defend himself. Both the alleged enquiry reports dated
                                    16.01.2025 and 03.03.2025 are ex facie illegal having been prepared ex
                                    parte without fixing any date, time or place of inquiry without recording
                                    any oral or documentary evidence and without affording any opportunity
                                    to the petitioner, thus rendering the same void ab initio and incapable of
                                    being relied upon. The inquiry reports dated 16.01.2025 and 03.03.2025
                                    were never served upon the petitioner prior to issuance of the final show
                                    cause notice dated 25.02.2026 and passing of the impugned dismissal
                                    order dated 18.04.2026, thereby violating the mandatory requirement of
                                    furnishing the inquiry report and seeking representation thereon, as
                                    contemplated under the statutory rules and settled law.

                                    5. In the facts and circumstances as stated above and from perusal of the
                                    arguements as advanced by the learned Senior Counsel, it is clear that the
                                    order of dismissal dated 18.04.2026 was passed in violation of provisions
                                    contained under the mandatory provisions of Rule 7(5) Rules, 1999 hence
                                    same is liable to be set aside and is hereby quashed.

                                    6. The writ petition is allowed. Respondent no.2 is directed to pass fresh
                                    order strictly in accordance with law and the procedure prescribed under
                                    Rule 7(5) of Rules, 1999 most expeditiously and preferably within three
                                    months from today.

                                    7. Registrar (Compliance) is directed to communicate copy of this order
                                    to the respondent no.2-District Magistrate, Hapur within a week.



                                                                                          (Prakash Padia,J.)
                                    May 12, 2026
                                    Pramod Tripathi




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