Disposed

Sarita Yadav v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC29 Jan 2019WRIA/1522/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging a school transfer order due to an alleged clerical error in the petitioner's preference. The court directed the respondent to consider the petitioner's grievances within two months.

What did the court decide?

Directed to submit fresh representation within three weeks; respondent directed to pass orders within two months of receipt.

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

¶1

Court No. - 18

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1522 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Sarita Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Lalta Prasad Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ram Prakash Shukla

¶4

Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Lalta Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel on behalf of respondent no.1 and Sri Ram Prakash Shukla, learned counsel, on behalf of respondent nos.2 and 3.

¶6

The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition with the following prayer:-

¶7

" 1- Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 20-8-2018 passed by the Respondent No.3 (Annexure No.1) to this writ petition "

¶8

The facts in brief as contained in the writ are that the petitioner was duly selected as Assistant Teacher and an appointment letter was issued to him on 20.6.2016. Pursuant to the said appointment letter the petitioner has joined as Assistant Teacher in primary school Seeki Chaura, Block Deegh, District Bhadohi.

¶9

In paragraph 6 of the writ petition, it is contended by the petitioner that due to inadvertent mistake, the petitioner has opted the primary school Garh Kalijer, Block Deegh, District Bhadohi, for her adjustment. It is further contended that at the relevant time correct location of the aforesaid primary school was not in the knowledge of the petitioner. The aforesaid request made by the petitioner was accepted and she was transferred from primary school Seeki Chaura, Block Deegh, District Bhadohi to primary school Garh Kalijer, Block Deegh, District Bhadohi vide transfer list issued by the respondent no.3 on 20.8.2018. Thereafter, the petitioner has submitted a fresh representation dated 23.8.2018 addressed to the District Basic Education Officer, Bhadohi, which is appended as annexure 3 to the writ petition.

¶10

In the facts and circumstances of the case and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the present writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage itself with the following directions:-

¶11

The petitioner is directed to make a fresh representation

¶12

ventilating all her grievances before the respondent no.2 alongwith certified copy of this order within a period of three weeks from today.

¶13

If such a representation is made, the respondent no.2 is directed to pass appropriate orders on the aforesaid representations in accordance with law within a further period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order along-with fresh representation.

¶14

With the aforesaid observations, present writ petition is disposed of finally.

¶15

Order Date :- 29.1.2019

¶16

Pramod Tripathi

Sarita Yadav v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sarita Yadav 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajeshwari Saraswat Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Krishna Kumar Singh Vs Union of India and 3 Ors.

Vinod Kumar Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Prem Narayan Mishra Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Smt. Praveena Sharma Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Prem Narayan Lal Srivastava Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others