Allahabad High Court
WRIA/11359/2026 of DR. ANIL KUMAR Vs STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS on 17 September 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 11359 of 2026 Court No. - 33 HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 2. This petition has been filed challenging the order dated 21.07.2026 passed by Additional Chief Secretary, Animal Husbandry
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 11359 of 2026
Court No. - 33
HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
2. This petition has been filed challenging the order dated 21.07.2026 passed by Additional Chief Secretary, Animal Husbandry Department, Government of Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow/respondent no. 2.
3. Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has been placed under suspension by the order impugned dated 21.07.2026 on the ground that the order impugned has been passed on a complaint made by concerned M.L.A. on 21.05.2026 to the Ministry.
4. By order dated 06.08.2026, instructions were called.
5. Today, instructions have been placed before this Court which are taken on record.
6. On the basis of instructions, it has been submitted by learned Standing Counsel that the order impugned has not been passed on the direction either of minister or M.L.A. concerned. Learned Standing Counsel has invited attention of the Court towards the annexure no. 7 filed by the petitioner himself, wherein the concerned M.L.A. has withdrawn the complaint and further submitted that the order of suspension has been passed much after the withdrawal of the complaint. There is no material on record to support the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner.
7. In view of the above, I am not inclined to interfere with the order Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ravi Anand Agarwal, Shreya Gupta Counsel for Respondent(s) : Adarsh Singh, C.S.C., Sadhana Maurya Dr. Anil Kumar .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s)
impugned.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the charge sheet has been submitted against the petitioner to which reply has been filed by the petitioner.
9. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, this petition is disposed of with a direction to disciplinary authority to conclude the disciplinary proceedings, in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months, after providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, provided there is no other legal impediment. September 18, 2026 Ved Prakash WRIA No. 11359 of 2026 2 (Manish Kumar Nigam,J.) Digitally signed by :- VED PRAKASH SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad