Disposed

shweta kushwaha v. State of U.P. and 03 others

Allahabad HC27 Mar 2018WRIA/7550/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought quashing of selection process orders and mandamus for appointment without examination. Court disposed of matter on consent via fresh representation to District Basic Education Officer within a week for consideration within three months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to file fresh representation before District Basic Education Officer, Allahabad within a week for consideration within three months.

shweta kushwaha Vs State of U.P. and… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 18

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 7550 of 2018 Petitioner :- Shweta Kushwaha Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 03 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajesh Kumar Singh,Rajesh Kumar Singh

¶3

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav

¶4

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶5

Heard Shri C.M. Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner; learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the State respondent; Shri A.K. Yadav, learned counsel for third and fourth respondent.

¶6

Petitioner has approached this Court with the following reliefs:-

¶7

(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned paragraph no.3 of the impugned letter/order dated 05.01.2018 issued by the respondent no.3, so far it relates to conducting the examination regarding post of Assistant Teachers of Primary institutions selected to impart education in English Medium and further to quash the consequential issuance of schedule for the said purpose under the letter/order dated 31.01.2018 issued by the respondent no.2 as well as the consequential advertisement dated 05.02.2018 issued by the respondent no.4 and the amended letter of the Director of Education (Basic), U.PL. at Lucknow dated 08.02.2018.

¶8

(ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondents to proceed with the proposed selection with regard to the appointment of Assistant Teachers in the proposed English Medium institutions in pursuance to the impugned letter/order dated 05.01.2018 without holding any written examination permitting the petitioner in her own institution selected for the said purpose.

¶9

At the very outset, Shri A.K. Yadav, Advocate submits the grievance of the petitioner is liable to be looked into and remedied by the District Basic Education Officer, Allahabad and in case petitioner approaches the Authority concerned by means of fresh representation, the same shall be considered by the Authority concerned in accordance with law.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that for redressal of his grievance, the petitioner would move a fresh representation before the District Basic Education Officer, Allahabad and direction shall be issued to the authority concerned to pass appropriate order within stipulated period.

¶11

In view of the above, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, on consent, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the direction that in case petitioner moves a fresh application/representation before the District Basic Education Officer, Allahabad within a week's period, the same would be considered and decided by the concerned Authority by a speaking order within further period of three months.

¶12

Order Date :- 27.3.2018 A. Pandey

shweta kushwaha v. State of U.P. and 03 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

shweta kushwaha v. State of U.P. and 03 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Satyendra Kumar Srivastava and 03 Others Vs State of U.P. and 03 Others

C/M, Vivkananad Intermediate College Naraini Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Baljeet Kumar Yadav Vs State of U P and 3 Others

Vijay Kumar Bharti and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Brijendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Neetu Pal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others