High Court · 2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State and perused the record.

2. The present petitioner has been filed with the following prayer: "i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature ofin the nature of 'Certiorari' to quash the recommended letter dated-28.01.2025 by the opposite party no.3 and as well as letter dated- 24.12.2024 by the opposite party no.6 against the petitioner in pursuance of the order dated- No.5075/7-Pan./Shi. 24.10.2024 Jaanch/Pradhan/2024-25as contained in Annexure No.1 & Annexure No.2 to this writ petition. letter i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus thereby commanding to theopposite parties not to take any coercive action against the petitioner unnecessary as issued letter dated-28.01.2025 and 24.12.2024 in pursuance of the order dated-24.10.2024 letter No.5075/7- Pan. Shi. Jaanch/Pradhan/2024-25 as contained in Annexure No.1 & 2 to this writ petition. iii. Issue any other suitable order or direction, which this Hon'ble court may deem, fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be passed in favor of the petitioner. iv. Allow the writ petition with cost."

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was working on the post of Panchayat Secretary at Motigarpur Block, District- Sultanpur, where with regard to certain allegations and complaints initiated by one Raj Bahadur, an enquiry committee was constituted and a decision was taken to refer the said matter for investigation/enquiry to the Vigilance Department. Subsequently, on 13.12.2021, petitioner was transferred to Kurebhar Block, District- Sultanpur. It has further been stated that after his transfer from block- Motigarpur, the petitioner did not handover entire charge to his successor and consequently, documents could not be forwarded to the Vigilance Cell for enquiry. It is in these circumstances that by means of order dated 28.01.2025 addressed to the petitioner, the District Development Officer, Sultanpur has directed to the petitioner to handover all the documents which were within his charge while working as Panchayat secretary in Block- Motigarpur, failing which, a disciplinary proceeding would be initiated against him. The petitioner has contested the aforesaid facts and has apprised the Block Development Officer on 23.02.2021 that the said documents are not in his charge and thereafter, he has approached this Court by means of present petition with the prayer to quash the order/recommendation dated 28.01.2025 passed by the District Development Officer, Sultanpur and also to restrain the respondents from initiating any coercive action against the petitioner.

4. Learned Standing Counsel has opposed the prayer of petitioner. He has submitted that while working as Panchayat secretary in Block- Motigarpur, the petitioner was entrusted with certain charge and documents which he was required to handover to his successor after his transfer but despite repeated requests being made, the said charges and documents were not handed over, and accordingly, the order dated 28.01.2025 has been issued. He has further submitted that neither has any disciplinary proceeding been initiated against the petitioner nor has he been inflicted with any adverse consequences, consequently, only to preempt the disciplinary action against the petitioner, the present petition has been preferred. He has next submitted that no Government servant is not entitled to retain charge/document of the post after being relieved from the same, and consequently, the petitioner ought to have handover the entire charge to his successor, which was not done by him. Accordingly, he has submitted that there is no irregularity in the order dated 28.01.2025 passed by District Development Officer, Sultanpur and the petition is liable to be dismissed.

5. I have heard the rival contentions of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. From the aforesaid facts, it is evident that according to the respondents, the petitioner, while being relieved from the post of Panchayat Secretary, Block- Mohtiharpur on 13.12.2021, has not handed over the entire charge to his successor, as a result, the matter has gained importance inasmuch as, as per the impugned order, the matter has been sent for vigilance enquiry where all the said documents are required to be placed but the documents which were under the charge of petitioner were not placed before it, due to which, repeated letters are being written. Merely by asking the petitioner to handover the charge, it does not seem to invite any adverse consequences to the petitioner and in case any such document is still within the charge of the petitioner then he is bound to give explanation with regard to the same or even if, they are not within his charge, a satisfactory reply has to be submitted by him.

6. Considering the aforesaid circumstances, I find that the order dated 28.01.2025 is a routine administrative order requiring petitioner to handover the charge. Undoubtedly, the order further endorses that in case, charge is not handed over by the petitioner then a disciplinary proceeding would be initiated against him. Again, I do not find any error or infirmity in such direction, inasmuch as, it is in those proceedings, it can be conclusively found, as to whether, the said documents were within the charge of the petitioner or not.

7. Accordingly, at this stage, I do not find any infirmity in the order dated 28.01.2025 or any ground for restraining the respondents from proceeding against the petitioner, in case, the impugned order is not complied with. I further take note of the fact that in case, the disciplinary proceedings are initiated, the petitioner would have adequate opportunity to place his contentions and defence with regard to the allegations levelled against him but such findings cannot be recorded in the present petition where he has been merely asked to hand over the documents within his charge.

8. For the reasons aforesaid, I do not find any merit in the petition. Accordingly, the writ petition being devoid of merits is hereby dismissed. (Alok Mathur,J.) Order Date :- 14.2.2025 V. Sinha VAISHALI SINHA VAISHALI SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Lucknow Bench

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State and perused the record.

2. The present petitioner has been filed with the following prayer: "i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature ofin the nature of 'Certiorari' to quash the recommended letter dated-28.01.2025 by the opposite party no.3 and as well as letter dated- 24.12.2024 by the opposite party no.6 against the petitioner in pursuance of the order dated- No.5075/7-Pan./Shi. 24.10.2024 Jaanch/Pradhan/2024-25as contained in Annexure No.1 & Annexure No.2 to this writ petition. letter i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus thereby commanding to theopposite parties not to take any coercive action against the petitioner unnecessary as issued letter dated-28.01.2025 and 24.12.2024 in pursuance of the order dated-24.10.2024 letter No.5075/7- Pan. Shi. Jaanch/Pradhan/2024-25 as contained in Annexure No.1 & 2 to this writ petition. iii. Issue any other suitable order or direction, which this Hon'ble court may deem, fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be passed in favor of the petitioner. iv. Allow the writ petition with cost."

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was working on the post of Panchayat Secretary at Motigarpur Block, District- Sultanpur, where with regard to certain allegations and complaints initiated by one Raj Bahadur, an enquiry committee was constituted and a decision was taken to refer the said matter for investigation/enquiry to the Vigilance Department. Subsequently, on 13.12.2021, petitioner was transferred to Kurebhar Block, District- Sultanpur. It has further been stated that after his transfer from block- Motigarpur, the petitioner did not handover entire charge to his successor and consequently, documents could not be forwarded to the Vigilance Cell for enquiry. It is in these circumstances that by means of order dated 28.01.2025 addressed to the petitioner, the District Development Officer, Sultanpur has directed to the petitioner to handover all the documents which were within his charge while working as Panchayat secretary in Block- Motigarpur, failing which, a disciplinary proceeding would be initiated against him. The petitioner has contested the aforesaid facts and has apprised the Block Development Officer on 23.02.2021 that the said documents are not in his charge and thereafter, he has approached this Court by means of present petition with the prayer to quash the order/recommendation dated 28.01.2025 passed by the District Development Officer, Sultanpur and also to restrain the respondents from initiating any coercive action against the petitioner.

4. Learned Standing Counsel has opposed the prayer of petitioner. He has submitted that while working as Panchayat secretary in Block- Motigarpur, the petitioner was entrusted with certain charge and documents which he was required to handover to his successor after his transfer but despite repeated requests being made, the said charges and documents were not handed over, and accordingly, the order dated 28.01.2025 has been issued. He has further submitted that neither has any disciplinary proceeding been initiated against the petitioner nor has he been inflicted with any adverse consequences, consequently, only to preempt the disciplinary action against the petitioner, the present petition has been preferred. He has next submitted that no Government servant is not entitled to retain charge/document of the post after being relieved from the same, and consequently, the petitioner ought to have handover the entire charge to his successor, which was not done by him. Accordingly, he has submitted that there is no irregularity in the order dated 28.01.2025 passed by District Development Officer, Sultanpur and the petition is liable to be dismissed.

5. I have heard the rival contentions of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. From the aforesaid facts, it is evident that according to the respondents, the petitioner, while being relieved from the post of Panchayat Secretary, Block- Mohtiharpur on 13.12.2021, has not handed over the entire charge to his successor, as a result, the matter has gained importance inasmuch as, as per the impugned order, the matter has been sent for vigilance enquiry where all the said documents are required to be placed but the documents which were under the charge of petitioner were not placed before it, due to which, repeated letters are being written. Merely by asking the petitioner to handover the charge, it does not seem to invite any adverse consequences to the petitioner and in case any such document is still within the charge of the petitioner then he is bound to give explanation with regard to the same or even if, they are not within his charge, a satisfactory reply has to be submitted by him.

6. Considering the aforesaid circumstances, I find that the order dated 28.01.2025 is a routine administrative order requiring petitioner to handover the charge. Undoubtedly, the order further endorses that in case, charge is not handed over by the petitioner then a disciplinary proceeding would be initiated against him. Again, I do not find any error or infirmity in such direction, inasmuch as, it is in those proceedings, it can be conclusively found, as to whether, the said documents were within the charge of the petitioner or not.

7. Accordingly, at this stage, I do not find any infirmity in the order dated 28.01.2025 or any ground for restraining the respondents from proceeding against the petitioner, in case, the impugned order is not complied with. I further take note of the fact that in case, the disciplinary proceedings are initiated, the petitioner would have adequate opportunity to place his contentions and defence with regard to the allegations levelled against him but such findings cannot be recorded in the present petition where he has been merely asked to hand over the documents within his charge.

8. For the reasons aforesaid, I do not find any merit in the petition. Accordingly, the writ petition being devoid of merits is hereby dismissed. (Alok Mathur,J.) Order Date :- 14.2.2025 V. Sinha VAISHALI SINHA VAISHALI SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Lucknow Bench