This court disposed of a matter regarding the petitioner's appointment. Having found the petitioner's joining substantiated against a clear vacancy, the petitioner was directed to continue discharging duties and is entitled to benefits including promotion.
Petitioner directed to continue discharging duty; entitled to benefits and promotion.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 13
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 65026 of 2006
Petitioner :- Sandhya Jain Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- R.R. Tripathi,Ashok Gupta,S.R.Sahu Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,R.P. Dubey
Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsels for the parties and perused the record.
By means of this writ petition, the petitioner prayed for a relief of quashing the order dated 25.04.2006 whereby, the petitioner's representation dated 14.04.2006 was rejected and it was held that since there was no vacancy of Assistant Teacher (Hindi) available in the Institution, the question of giving joining to the petitioner did not arise.
While entertaining the writ petition, this Court passed a detailed order and in the ultimate part it directed the District Inspector of Schools to ensure the appointment to the petitioner in view of recommendation made by the Selection Board within a period of three weeks. It was further observed that any appointment given to the petitioner shall be subject to the final order that is to be passed in the writ petition.
It appears that in compliance of the order of this Court, the petitioner has been permitted to join the Institution namely Lal Bahadur Shastri Uchchatar Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Kichha, Bareilly on 21.02.2007 under the appointment order issued by the Manager of the Institution dated 05.01.2007. The petitioner submitted his joining on 21.02.2007 and since then he is continuing in service. Since it is not disputed that the Institution, where the petitioner has been given joining, had the substantive vacancy of Assistant Teacher (L.T. Grade), I find that the appointment and joining of the petitioner dated 05.01.2007 and 21.02.2007 is not any more questionable. The petitioner's appointment being substantive and against the clear vacancy, the petitioner shall be continued to discharge his duty as such and shall be entitled to all benefits including promotion etc. as and when it arises.
Writ petition is therefore, disposed of in the above terms.
Order Date :- 23.5.2018 IrfanUddin
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to dispose of a writ petition regarding statutory appointment after prior compliance from the high court.
Sandhya Jain
State Of U.P.
Ajit Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
