WRIT - A No. 9080 of 2026 at Allahabad

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 9080 of 2026 Rahul Singh .....Petitioner(s) Versus The State Of U.P. And Another .....Respondent(s) Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Kailash Prakash Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Court No. - 38 HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J. 1. Heard Sri Kailash Prakash Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing counsel for respondents. 2. The order of suspension dated 13.5.2026 passed by Superintendent of Police, Sant Kabir Nagar-respondent No.2 is under challenge. 3. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that suspension order has been passed without conducting any preliminary enquiry and now preliminary enquiry is being initiated against the petitioner. 4. Undisputedly the law with respect to the ambit of the power to suspend under the 1991 Rules stands settled in light of the judgment rendered by a learned Judge of the Court in Sachchida Nand Tripathi v. State of U.P. And 2 Others [Writ A No. 69308 of 2013]. Dealing with an identical question the learned Judge in the case of Sachchida Nand Tripathi held thus:- "11. On this aspect, I am fortified by the observations made by Full Bench in Raj Veer Singh (supra