AKHILESH KUMAR TRIPATHI Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri J.P.N. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri P.K. Srivastava, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel.

(2.) By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, petitioner has assailed the order dtd. 8/4/2025 passed by the District Magistrate/ District Program Coordinator, District Mau and the consequential order passed by Chief Development Officer on 8/4/2025.

(3.) The short point argued before the Court is that once the petitioner was issued with show-cause notice and he submitted reply, the reply ought to have given due consideration by the competent authority while passing the order on 8/4/2025, however, the authority in the order impugned just referred to the reply given by the petitioner on 8/5/2024 and returned a finding that reply was not found satisfactory.