Disposed

Shrikant and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC24 May 2019WPIL/1166/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Filings sought direction to construct boundary walls and provide infrastructure to Basic Schools in Dhanpur. Court granted liberty to approach Director Basic Education with a fresh representation, directing authority to issue directions within three months.

What did the court decide?

Granted liberty to file fresh representation to Director Basic Education; directed authority to issue directions for construction within three months.

Shrikant and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others — Education and Admissions | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 21

¶2

Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 1166 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Shrikant And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Babu Ram Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav

¶4

Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel,J. Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.

¶5

The petitioners have preferred this Public Interest Litigation proceedings amongst other relief:

¶6

1. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing to the respondents for considering the application dated 23.7.2018 according to law and constructing the boundary wall of the Junior Basic School and Senior Basic School, Gram Panchayat- Pure Satbhama Block Dhanpur, Tehsil Handia district Allahabad now Prayagraj and providing other infrastructure for the above said Basic Schools as early as possible.

¶7

The grievance of the petitioners is that the Junior Basic School Pure Satbhama, Block, Dhanpur, Tehsil Handia district Allahabad was established by Board of Basic Education Uttar Pradesh, Allahabad in the year 1990 and since then the said primary school was running continuously.

¶8

In the year 2007, the Board of Basic Education Uttar Pradesh, Allahabad established a Senior Basic School in the premises of the above said Junior Basic School by constructing a new building. The basic education is provided in the said institutions, but boundary wall is not there. No boundary wall has been raised and other amenities are also not available to the students of the institutions.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that all children of the age of six to fourteen have fundamental right to have free and compulsory education. It is stated that by Eighty Sixth

¶10

Amendment Article 21 A has been inserted. The said article cast an obligation on State to provide quality education to the all children between said age group. Accordingly, it is the duty of the State to provide necessary infrastructure and amenities to the junior High School where the education are imparted to the students upto the age of 14 years.

¶11

We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned standing counsel.

¶12

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we are granting liberty to the petitioners to make a fresh representation along-with certified copy of this order to the Director Basic Education, U.P. Allahabad raising his grievance in the above representation within three weeks. The Director, Basic Education, U.P. Allahabad is directed to issue necessary direction in accordance with law to the competent authority expeditiously preferably within three months from the date of communication of this order.

¶13

With this direction this writ petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 24.5.2019

¶14

N.A.

Shrikant and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shrikant and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Satyapal Singh Vs Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. and 3 Others

Shailendra Kumar Vs Union of India and 2 Others

Ram Lakhan Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Samay Singh Vs State of U.P. and 12 Others

Anil Kumar Pal Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Balram Yadav Vs State of U P and 5 Others