Disposed

Ayyub Ali Hashmi v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC23 Feb 2018WRIA/5986/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Directs Joint Director of Education to dispose of petitioner's claim under Section 33-C within three months, seeking comments from Committee of Management. Disposes of petition without expressing opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Joint Director of Education to consider petitioner's grievance and pass appropriate order within three months after obtaining comments from Committee of Management.

Ayyub Ali Hashmi Vs State of U.P. and 3… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 18

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5986 of 2018 Petitioner :- Ayyub Ali Hashmi Respondent :- State of U.P. and 3 others Counsel for Petitioner :- Raj Mohan Saggi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶3

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶4

Heard Shri R.M. Saggi, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State respondent nos.1 to 3. Notice need not be issued to the private respondent no.4 in view of the order proposed to be passed.

¶5

The petitioner is before this Court with request to issue direction to the second respondent i.e. Joint Director of Education, Jhansi Region, Jhansi to decide his claim under Section 33-C of U.P. Secondary Education Service Commission Act within stipulated time and for directions to the respondents to treat him as regular Assistant Teacher and not to interfere in his working as Assistant Teacher in B.M.H.S Rehmaniya Inter College Maudahan, District Hamirpur.

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner has already filed a representation dated 19.6.2017 before the respondent no.2 for redressal of his grievance, which is still pending. He has confined his prayer only to the relief that his representation dated 19.6.2017 may be considered by the appropriate authority.

¶7

Learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the respondents has no objection to the said prayer.

¶8

No useful purpose would be served in keeping the writ petition pending.

¶9

In view of above, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the issue and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this writ petition is disposed of finally with a direction to the Joint Director of Education, Jhansi Region, Jhansi to look into the grievance of the petitioner and pass appropriate order in accordance with law after seeking necessary comments from the Committee of Management of the institution, which has been arrayed as respondent no.4 to the writ petition, within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order before him.

¶10

Order Date :- 23.2.2018 RKP

Ayyub Ali Hashmi v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ayyub Ali Hashmi v. State of U.P. and 3 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

Manorma Vs State of U.P and 02 Others

Daya Prakash Masih Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Kanchan Kumari Vs State of U.P and 02 Others

Surendra Singh and 19 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Pushpendra Kumar and 35 Others Vs Union of India through Secretary Mhrd New Delhi and 4 Others

Dinesh Prasad Tripathi Vs State of U.P. through Secretary Basic Education Sachiwalaya Building U.P. at Lucknow and 3 Others