Disposed

Vijay Pratap Singh and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC18 Nov 2019WRIA/15225/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This revision bench, without deciding merits, disposed of the writ petition concerning Assistant Teacher appointments. It directed petitioners to file a fresh representation before the District Basic Education Officer regarding grievances arising from the termination of candidates appointed on forged credentials.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to file a fresh representation before the District Basic Education Officer, Mathura, within two weeks regarding their claims.

Vijay Pratap Singh and 4 Others Vs State of U.P… — Education and Admissions | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 3

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 15225 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Vijay Pratap Singh And 4 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Seemant Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav

¶4

Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Seemant Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Ashok Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for respondent no.3.

¶6

The petitioners claims to have participated in the selection of 16448 posts of Assistant Teacher to be appointed in Junior Basic School in District Mathura. The petitioners have been called for counselling but in the final list their names did not appear.

¶7

According to the petitioners, a large number of candidates have got selected on the basis of forged testimonials and services of some of the candidates, whose names have been mentioned in paragraph 13 of the writ petition, have been terminated.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that if those persons had not been appointed on the basis of forged testimonials, the petitioners would have got the appointment.

¶9

In the aforesaid backdrop, following relief has been prayed for by the petitioners:-

¶10

"i. Issue a writ order or direction, in the nature of Mandamus directing the District Basic Education Officer, Mathura to consider the claim of the petitioners with regard to their selection and appointment against the post got vacant on account of termination of 6 candidates having been appointed on the basis of fake and forged Diploma in Education (2 years course) within stipulated period of time as fixed by this Hon'ble Court."

¶11

Learned counsel for the respondents contends that petitioners have no right to be appointed on the post of Assistant Teacher as the name of the petitioners did not appear in the merit list and the selection on the aforesaid posts have already been completed. However, he submits that if petitioners are aggrieved, they may approach before respondent no.3-District Basic Education Officer, Mathura, who shall consider the grievance of the petitioners in accordance with law.

¶12

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without

¶13

going into the merits of the case and with the consent of the parties, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioners to file a fresh representation before the respondent no.3-District Basic Education Officer, Mathura raising all their grievances within a period of two weeks from today. In case any such representation is filed by the petitioners, the respondent no.3 shall consider and decide the same by reasoned and speaker order within a period of three months thereafter.

¶14

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

¶15

Order Date :- 18.11.2019 Sattyarth

Vijay Pratap Singh and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Pratap Singh and 4 Others 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ujjwal Rastogi Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Piyush Anand Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

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

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

Abhisek Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

C/M Dayawati Modi Kanya Junior High School Shahjahanpur, and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another