Allowed

C/M Swami Chandra Shekhar Giri Balika Vidyalaya, and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC16 Feb 2018WRIA/5802/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed by a school management committee challenging an order refusing approval for teacher appointments due to a statewide ban. The Court set aside the order and remitted the matter for fresh consideration.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside and matter remitted to District Basic Education Officer, Deoria to consider afresh within two months.

C/M Swami Chandra Shekhar Giri Balika Vidyalaya… — Education and Admissions | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 18

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5802 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- C/M Swami Chandra Shekhar Giri Balika Vidyalaya, And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Grijesh Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Shyam Krishna Gupta

¶4

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶5

The petitioner-Committee of Management of a recognized and aided junior High School, is aggrieved by order of the Basic Shiksha Adhikari dated 6.2.2018, whereby he has declined to accord approval for appointment in the institution on the ground that State Govt. has put a ban for recruitment of teachers and other employees.

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention of the Court to two Govt. Orders dated 4.11.2015 and 15.9. 2014, whereby the State Govt. has relaxed the ban and in the Govt. Order dated 15.9.2014 a specific direction has been issued to fill up vacant 800 posts of Headmaster, 1444 posts of assistant teachers and 525 posts of non teaching staff. Copy of the said Govt. Order is on record as annexure no. 3 to the writ petition.

¶7

Learned counsel for petitioner has further placed reliance upon judgment of this Court in Committee of Management, Nehru Kissan Vidyalaya Junior High School Vs. State of U.P. and others, Writ-A No. 58220 of 2016, decided on 31.1.2017. The said matter was also in respect of a recognized and aided junior high school and the issue which fell for consideration in the said case, is identical and similar which arises in the present case.

¶8

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents. As there is no factual dispute involved, no useful purpose would be served by calling response from the respondents and keep the matter pending. Hence, with the consent of counsel for the parties, the petition is being disposed of at the admission stage itself in terms of the Rules of the Court.

¶9

In view of the above, the order impugned dated 6.2.2018 is unsustainable. Accordingly, it is set aside and the matter is remitted to the District Basic Education Officer, Deoriarespondent no.2 to consider the matter afresh in the light of observations made hereinabove. The said exercise be completed

¶10

after affording opportunity to the petitioner-committee of management, expeditiously preferably within two months from the date of communication of the order.

¶11

With the above direction, the writ petition stands finally disposed of. No order as to costs.

¶12

Order Date :- 16.2.2018 RKP

C/M Swami Chandra Shekhar Giri Balika Vidyalaya, and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C/M Swami Chandra Shekhar Giri Balika Vidyalaya, and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

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 Shree Swamidin Purv Madhyamik Vidyalay, Khatwara Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ruby Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Virendra Kumar Tiwari Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Priyanka Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.

Sachin Kumar Vs State of Up and 4 Others

Sangeeta Awasthi Vs State of U.P. and 3 Ors.