Disposed

Rajesh Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC5 Feb 2018WRIA/4612/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order sets aside the District Inspector of Schools' order denying salary. It directs the respondent to reconsider the petitioner's representation with a reasoned order within four weeks, aligning with Sushil Kumar Yadav, though explicitly averring no merit was examined.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order by District Inspector of Schools set aside; direction to reconsider representation with reasoned order within four weeks.

Rajesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 18

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4612 of 2018 Petitioner :- Rajesh Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Petitioner :- Bheem Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶3

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶4

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel.

¶5

Lala Babu Baijal Memorial Inter College, Lodipur, Hapur, an intermediate institution, duly recognized and in grant-in-aid of the State. Provisions of Intermediate Education Act, 1921 and U.P. High School and Intermediate College (Payment of Salaries of the Teachers and Other Employees) Act, 1971 are applicable on the institution. The petitioner claims to have been appointed Assistant Teacher under sub-Section 11 of Section 16-E of the Intermediate Education Act, 1921, against a vacancy having arisen in the institution. By the instant petition, petitioner seeks salary for the post of Assistant Teacher.

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the controversy involved in the petition is squarely covered by a decision rendered in Sushil Kumar Yadav and another Vs. State of U.P. and 3 others (Writ-A No. 48244 of 2017) decided on 31.10.2017, therefore, it is urged that the petition may be decided in terms of the aforementioned decision. Learned standing counsel does not dispute the legal proposition.

¶7

In regard thereto, writ petition, on consent, stands disposed of by passing the following order:

¶8

i.) impugned order dated 19.02.2015 passed by the third respondent, District Inspector of Schools, Hapur is set aside.

¶9

ii.) the third respondent-District Inspector of Schools, Hapur is directed to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner by a reason and speaking order in terms of the decision rendered in Sushil Kumar Yadav (supra), expeditiously, preferably within four weeks from the date of filing of certified copy of this order.

¶10

It is made clear that the Court has not considered the claim and contention of the petitioner on merit.

¶11

Order Date :- 5.2.2018 RKP

Rajesh Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

C/M Kishan Junior High School Sherpur Khader, Muzaffarnagar through Its Manager, Babu Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

C/M Janta Junior High School Karhera, Muzaffarnagar, through Its Manager Manoj Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Arbind Kumar Singh and 1 Other Vs State of U.P.and 4 Others

Sahab Sartaj Vs State of U.P.

Riyasat Ali Khan Vs State of U.P.

Ram Bharose Vs the State of Uttar Pradesh