Disposed

Arun Kumar v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC27 Nov 2019WRIA/14581/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition filed by an Assistant Teacher seeking restoration to his original posting. With the consent of the parties, the court directed the petitioner to submit a fresh representation to the District Basic Education Officer within two weeks for consideration under the relevant judgment.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with liberty to submit a fresh representation to the respondent no.3 within two weeks.

Arun Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 3

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14581 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Arun Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shashank Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Vikram Bahadur Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent no.1 and Sri Vikram Bahadur Singh, learned counsel for respondent nos.2 and 3.

¶6

The petitioner was working as Assistant Teacher in Unchcha Prathmik Vidyalaya Rusi, Block Deomai, District Fatehpur. Pursuant to the Government Order dated 20.07.2018, the petitioner was transferred and adjusted in the Uchcha Prathmik Vidyalaya, Delekheda Khajuha, District Fatehpur. The Government Order dated 20.07.2018 has been set aside by the Lucknow Bench of this Court in the case of Smt. Reena Singh and Others Vs. State of U.P. & Others 2019 (1) ADJ 319 (LB).

¶7

The grievance of the petitioner is that since the Government Order dated 20.07.2018 pursuant to which he was adjusted has been set aside, therefore, he is entitled to be restored back at his original place of posting i.e. Unchcha Prathmik Vidyalaya Rusi, Block Deomai, District Fatehpur. Petitioner in this regard has submitted a representation to the respondent no.3-District Basic Education Officer, Fatehpur, copy of the same is annexed as Annexure 10 to the writ petition.

¶8

Learned counsel for the respondents contends that no useful purpose would be served in keeping the writ petition pending and appropriate direction be issued to respondent no.3-District Basic Education Officer to consider the grievance of the petitioner.

¶9

Be that as it may, the adjustment order dated 01.09.2018 clearly reflects that the said order has been passed pursuant to the Government Order dated 20.07.2018 which has been set aside by the Lucknow Bench of this Court, therefore, petitioner is also entitled to the benefit of the judgement of Lucknow Bench of this Court.

¶10

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and with the consent of the parties, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to submit a fresh representation before

¶11

the respondent no.3-District Basic Education Officer, Fatehpur raising all his grievances within a period of two weeks from today. In case any such representation is filed by the petitioner, the respondent no.3 shall consider and decide the same in accordance with law in the light of judgement of Lucknow Bench of this Court in the case of Smt. Reena Singh (supra) within a period of one month thereafter.

¶12

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of . Order Date :- 27.11.2019 Sattyarth

Arun Kumar v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arun Kumar v. State of U.P. and 2 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

Brijendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Deshraj Patel Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Sunil Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Prachi Sharma and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Rama Devi Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shalini Kulshreshtha Vs State of U P and 2 Others