Disposed

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

Allahabad HC23 Feb 2018WRIA/6552/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of a writ petition seeking arrears of honorarium for Prerak posts under Shakshar Bharat Mission. Disregarding merit, the court directed the Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari to consider the petitioners' representation and pass a reasoned order within two months.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Bareilly to consider the petitioners' representation and decide it via a reasoned order within two months.

Pushpendra Kumar and 35 Others Vs Union of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 18

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6552 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Pushpendra Kumar And 35 Others Respondent :- Union Of India Through Secretary Mhrd New Delhi And 4 Others

¶4

Counsel for Petitioner :- Anwar Mehdi Zaidi Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,Ram Chandra

¶5

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State respondent, Shri Vijay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for fourth respondent and Shri P.D. Tripathi, learned counsel for fifth respondent.

¶7

Petitioners, who are 36 in number, are before this Court with the request to command the competent authority for ensuring the arrears of Honorarium of 38 months from the month of September 2014 to the month of November 2017 total 38 months.

¶8

It appears that are working on the post of Prerak in different Centre and block of District Bareilly on the fix/honorarium of Rs.2000/- per month under the Shakshar Bharat Mission 2012 and it is claimed that salary/honorarium has not been paid for the period September 2014 to the month of November 2017.

¶9

In support of his submission, learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance on the order dated 24.11.2016 passed in Writ A no.54761 of 2016 (Atik Ahmad and others vs. State of U.P. and others) wherein this Court has proceeded to ask the petitioners to submit a fresh representation before the respondent and the same shall be decided by the Authority concerned within stipulated time. He has also apprised to the Court that for redressal of their grievance, petitioners have already represented before the 29.12.2017 before the District Magistrate, Bareilly but the same is still pending consideration.

¶10

Learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, Shri Vijay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for fourth respondent and Shri P.D. Tripathi, learned counsel for fifth respondent very fairly submit that in case any such claim/representation is still pending, the same shall be decided at the earliest.

¶11

With the consent of the parties, without adverting to the merit of the case, the writ petition is disposed of asking the fifth respondent i.e. Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Bareilly to consider and decide the representation of the petitioners by a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably, within two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶12

Order Date :- 23.2.2018 A. Pandey

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

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

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

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