Allowed

C/M, M.Q. Inter College Seohara, and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC12 Jul 2018WRIA/14851/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ Petition in service matter concerning withdrawal of permission for principal recruitment. Order impugned quashed on grounds of non-application of mind and lack of material consideration. Matter remitted to respondent to pass fresh order while affording hearing opportunity to petitioner within time limit.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order of 07.03.2018 quashed; matter remitted to Joint Director of Education to pass fresh order within three weeks.

C/M, M.Q. Inter College Seohara, and Another Vs… — Education and Admissions | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 7 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14851 of 2018 Petitioner :- C/M, M.Q. Inter College Seohara, And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Fuzail Ahmad Ansari Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶2

Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J.

¶3

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned standing counsel for the State-respondents.

¶4

This writ petition has been filed praying for the following relief:

¶5

"(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari calling for the record of the case and quash the impugned order dated 07.03.2018 passed by the Joint Director of Education, XIIth Region, Moradabad - respondent no.2 (Annexure no.8 to the writ petition).

¶6

(ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus staying / suspending the effect, operation and implmentation of the impugned order dated 07.03.2018 passed by the Joint Director of Education, XIIth Region, Moradabad - respondent no.2 (Annexure no.8 to the writ petition).

¶7

(iii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing and commanding the Joint Director of Education, XIIth Region, Moradabad - respondent no.2 to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law for granting / reviving the prior permission for filling up the permanent post of Principal in the institution namely, 'M.Q. Inter College, Seohara, Bijnor' within stipulated time."

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the impugned order has been passed without noticing the true facts inasmuch pursuant to the permission granted, the advertisement was issued on 17.10.2017 which was followed by another advertisement dated 17.12.2017 and the interview was completed. Since the quorum was not complete, therefore, the interview was cancelled, which was duly informed to the respondent No.2 by letter dated 04.01.2018 sent by registered post. A fresh advertisement was issued on 11.03.2018, which was published in the newspaper. Therefore, withdrawal of the permission for recruitment on the post of Principal by the impugned order dated 07.03.2018 is not based on consideration of the relevant facts.

¶9

Sri S.P. Singh, learned standing counsel states that the respondent No.2 shall consider the grievance of the petitioner and shall pass an appropriate order in accordance with law within a time bound period.

¶10

In view of the aforesaid, the impugned order dated 07.03.2018 is quashed. Matter is remitted back to the respondent No.2 to pass an order afresh strictly in accordance with law, expeditiously preferably within three weeks from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order along with representation, after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

¶11

The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observations.

¶12

Order Date :- 12.7.2018/NLY

C/M, M.Q. Inter College Seohara, and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C/M, M.Q. Inter College Seohara, and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dilip Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Minakshi Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Subhash Chandra Laboratory Attendant (Botany) Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Bachchalal Ram Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sadhana Mishra Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Smt. Rajvati Devi Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others