Dismissed

Gaurav Kumar v. State of U.P. and Others

Allahabad HC11 Apr 2018SPLA/1184/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Special Appeal against dismissal of writ petition challenging a Chuaidar appointment at an Intermediate College. The court mandated proving statutory compliance; appellant failed to cite relevant Act provisions or evidence after five years, leading to dismissal.

What did the court decide?

The Special Appeal is dismissed as the appellant failed to substantiate that the appointment was made in accordance with the law.

Gaurav Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Others — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 39

¶2

Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 1184 of 2012

¶3

Appellant :- Gaurav Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others Counsel for Appellant :- S.N. Jaiswal Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Dilip Gupta,J. Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.

¶5

This Special Appeal arises out of a judgment and order dated 28 May 2012 of a learned Judge of this Court by which the writ petition has been dismissed for the reason that no evidence was placed by the writ petitioner to establish that an appointment was offered to the petitioner in a recognized Intermediate College after following the procedure.

¶6

The order is reproduced below:-

¶7

"Despite the order of the Court dated 22.05.2012, counsel for the petitioner has not brought on record any document which can establish that any advertisement was published or any selection committee in accordance with the provisions applicable was constituted before making appointment.

¶8

Therefore, in the facts of the case this Court finds that there is no material evidence which could establish that the appointment was offered to the petitioner in recognized Intermediate College after following the procedure known to law, so as to entitle the petitioner for any mandamus being granted in the matter of discharge of duties in the institution.

¶9

Writ petition is dismissed."

¶10

When the Special Appeal was taken up on 3 January 2013, the Court passed the following order:-

¶11

"The basic rule of challenging any order, according to pure common sense, is to examine each reason given in the impugned order because of which the order has been passed adversely to the litigant, and to find out answers to each of those reasons and incorporate those answers in the memo of appeal or in the writ petition.

¶12

No such effort having been made, we decline to interfere at this stage.

¶13

List this case after one month to enable the appellant to meet every single reason given by the learned Single Judge in the order under challenge, by filing a supplementary affidavit."

¶14

However, on 4 February 2013 when the Special Appeal was next listed, learned counsel for the appellant sought time and

¶15

the order is reproduced below:-

¶16

"As prayed by learned counsel for the appellant, list in the next cause list so as to enable him, in the light of the detailed order of this court dated 03.01.2003, to first read the law which prescribes the procedure for appointment and then to enclose facts or documents to show that each part of the procedure required by law has been followed in making the appointment of the appellant."

¶17

A supplementary affidavit has been filed but a bare perusal of the affidavit indicates that the petitioner has not referred to any provision of law for appointment of a Chaukidar in Intermediate College. Even during the course of hearing of the Appeal, learned counsel for the appellant has not been able to point out any provision of law despite this Appeal having been listed after five years in 2018. The provisions for making an appointment are contained in Chapter III of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921. The procedure prescribed has not been followed and nor learned counsel for the appellant has been able to substantiate that the appellant was appointed in accordance with law.

¶18

The Special Appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.

¶19

Order Date :- 11.4.2018 sartaj

¶20

(Dilip Gupta,J.)

¶21

(Neeraj Tiwari,J.)

Gaurav Kumar v. State of U.P. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gaurav Kumar v. State of U.P. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

hansraj tyagi Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.

Vijay Kumar Saxena and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

satendra kumar Vs State of U.P. and 4 Ors.

Tarun Chetana Sansthan and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Others

Smt. Meera Devi Vs State of U.P. and Others

hira lal singh Vs State of U.P. and 4 Ors.