Disposed

Seema Mishra v. State of U.P. and 25 Others

Allahabad HC1 Mar 2019WPIL/14337/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a PIL regarding unauthorized running of schools and alleged embezzlement, the court found direct judicial intervention unnecessary. It disposed of the petition by allowing the petitioner to approach the Managing Director of the entity running the schools with a certified copy of this order for redressal.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner kept liberty to approach Respondent No. 4 (Managing Director, Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Limited, Lucknow) with a certified copy of this order within one month for redressal.

Seema Mishra Vs State of U.P. and 25 Others — Education and Admissions | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Chief Justice's Court

¶2

Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 14337 of 2017

¶3

Petitioner :- Seema Mishra Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 25 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Seema Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Anil Kumar Mehrotra

¶4

Hon'ble Govind Mathur,Chief Justice Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.

¶5

Counter affidavit on behalf of respondent nos. 3, 4, 5, 6, 15, 16, 17 and 18 has been filed today in Court by Sri A.K. Mehrotra, Advocate, the same is taken on record.

¶6

This petition for writ is preferred to have reliefs as follows:-

¶7

"i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to produce the Original Records pertaining to the Six Primary Schools, which are being running by the respondent no. 21 to 26 as well as Obra Intermediate College Obra Sonebhadra and summon the records of concerning orders of District Inspector of Schools, Sonebhadra/respondent no. 13 dated 12.06.1989 (contained as Annexure No. 3 to the writ petition) and order of Joint Director of Education Vindhyachal Mandal Mirzapur/Respondent No. 11 dated 12.08.2013 (contained as Annexure No. 10 to the writ petition).

¶8

ii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari by quashing all the illegal appointments of Teachers, Lecturers and other employees of Obra Intermediate College Obra Sonebhadra, who are working and posted against Law and Rules which are prescribed under Madhyamik Shiksha Sewa Chayan Ayog (Adhyapak Evam Karmchari Chayan Ayog, 1982).

¶9

iii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus stopping the double aiding at Obra Intermediate College, Obra Sonebhadra and restrain the respondents to draw the Salary of the staffs of the aforesaid Obra Intermediate College, Obra Sonebhadra as well as Six Primary Schools, which are being running by the respondent no. 21 to 26, which are being running unrecognized, unaided and not permitted by any authority as well as against law and Rules subject to the result of present Public Interest Litigation.

¶10

iv. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing to take legal and strict action against the Criminal acts about the forgery, Fabrication, Embezzlement and misappropriation of public

¶11

money and public property.

¶12

v. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing to vacate the Public Building, in which, Six Primary Schools as well as Obra Intermediate College, Obra Sonebhadra are being run with free of cost, free maintenance charges, free electricity and also direct to vacate the Residential public building of School Staffs and employees, which are being used free of cost and free water and electric supply.

¶13

vi. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the competent Authority to recover the Salary withdrawn by the respondents from their own resources since 1967 to till date."

¶14

It is contended by the petitioner who happens to be a practicing Advocate at Allahabad that respondents knowingly and deliberately playing fraud by running unauthorized educational institutions and have caused embezzlement of huge public money. It is also stated that out of the sanctioned posts in 6 primary schools, only 55 teachers are working and, as such, the respondents are withdrawing salary from State Exchequer without having adequate appointment. Having considered all facts of the case, we are of the view that necessary steps are required to be taken by the Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Limited, Lucknow, which is running the schools in question, if any alleged illegality exists.

¶15

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of by keeping the petitioner at liberty to approach respondent no. 4 – Managing Director, Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Limited, Lucknow for redressal of her grievance. The petitioner if presents a copy of this petition for writ along with a certified copy of this order before Managing Director, Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Limited, Lucknow within a period of one month from today, then the same shall be considered in accordance with law.

¶16

Order Date :- 1.3.2019 Shubham

¶17

(Saurabh Shyam Shamshery, J.) (Govind Mathur, C.J.)

Seema Mishra v. State of U.P. and 25 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Seema Mishra v. State of U.P. and 25 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

Ujma Khatoon Alias Astha Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Sri Maithil Brahman Sanskrit Pathshala and Another Vs State of U.P. and Others

Kunwar Sain and Others Vs State of U.P. and Others

Vinod Kumar Rai Vs State of U.P. and Others

M/S Target Centre Vs the Commissioner Commercial Tax Lko.

Ram Sunder Vs State of U.P. and 23 Others