Allahabad High Court Upholds Relief to UP Officer Punished Over Facebook Post on Ambedkar Jayanti Tiranga Rally

The Allahabad High Court recently refused to interfere with a tribunal order that quashed disciplinary action against a senior Uttar Pradesh government officer who was punished over a Facebook post concerning a Tiranga Rally held in Saharanpur on Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Jayanti in 2018.

Answering the question whether the officer's social media comment amounted to criticism of the government, the high court held that it did not.

The bench of Justices Alok Mathur and Amitabh Kumar Rai found that the authorities had proceeded against the officer without even verifying her original Facebook post and had relied solely on a newspaper report while imposing punishment.

The case arose from a writ petition filed by the State government challenging a December 2025 order of the U.P. Public Services Tribunal, which had set aside the punishment imposed on officer Rashmi.

Rashmi was initially appointed as an Economic and Statistics Officer in 1992 and was later promoted as Deputy Director in the Economic and Statistics Division. During her posting in Saharanpur, a Facebook post attributed to her became the subject of a news report published in Dainik Jagran on February 4, 2018.

Based on the newspaper report, the government issued a charge-sheet alleging that her comments amounted to criticism of the government and violated Rule 7 of the U.P. Government Servants' Conduct Rules, 1956.

Rule 7 of the U.P. Government Servants' Conduct Rules prohibits government employees from making public statements, comments, or opinions that criticise decisions of their superiors or government policies, or that could embarrass relations between governments. However, the restriction does not apply to statements made by a government servant in an official capacity while performing assigned duties.

According to the allegations, Rashmi had commented that during a Tiranga Rally organised on the occasion of Ambedkar Jayanti, Dr. Ambedkar appeared to be missing and had perhaps been overtaken by the "Bhagwa colour".

She denied the charge and submitted that the newspaper had not correctly reproduced her Facebook comments. She also maintained that her remarks had nothing to do with the government, did not affect law and order and could not be treated as criticism of any government policy or functioning.

Despite her explanation, an inquiry officer held the charge proved. Thereafter, the State imposed the punishment of permanent withholding of two increments along with a censure entry in November 2019.

Did The Authorities Verify The Actual Facebook Post Before Punishing The Officer?

The high court's answer was an emphatic no.

The bench noted that once Rashmi had specifically disputed the contents attributed to her and had stated that the newspaper report did not accurately reflect her comments, it became the duty of the authorities to verify the original Facebook post.

Court observed that the authorities "did not even bother" to bring the original Facebook comments on record and continued the disciplinary proceedings solely on the basis of the newspaper article.

The judges held that after the officer had dissociated herself from the reported comments, the authorities were required to ascertain the actual contents of the Facebook post before proceeding further.

No Misconduct Was Made Out

Court said that even if the newspaper report was taken at face value, the comments merely referred to the absence of Dr. Ambedkar in the rally.

The bench observed that it failed to understand how such a comment could be construed as criticism of the government. It pointed out that there was no reference to the government, any governmental policy or any government functioning.

Court further noted that the Tiranga Rally mentioned in the report was a private rally and had no affiliation or connection with the government or any of its agencies.

Relying on the principle that administrative decisions must disclose reasons and show application of mind, court found serious flaws in the disciplinary process.

It held that the inquiry officer had failed to properly consider Rashmi's defence and that the disciplinary authority had also ignored the issues raised by her.

According to the court, these circumstances clearly showed that the punishment order had been passed without application of mind. It also held that the alleged comments did not disclose any misconduct under the 1956 Conduct Rules.

Finding no error in the tribunal's decision, the high court dismissed the State government's petition and upheld the order quashing the punishment imposed on Rashmi.

Case Title: State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Planning Deptt. Lko. vs. Rashmi

Order Date: May 29, 2026

Bench: Justices Alok Mathur and Amitabh Kumar Rai