Disposed

Ram Prakash Rai v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC9 Dec 2019WRIA/19694/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner sought directions for inquiry regarding a missing service book and recovery of arrears. The court disposed of the petition without delving into merits, directing the District Basic Educational Officer to comply with a previous order within one month.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondent no. 2 to comply with the order dated 16.07.2019 within one month.

Ram Prakash Rai Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Education and Admissions | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 49

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19694 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Ram Prakash Rai Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Awadhesh Kumar Malviya Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ras Bihari Pradhan

¶4

Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent no. 1 and Sri R.B. Pradhan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no. 2.

¶6

In view of the order proposed to be passed today, notices need not be issued to the respondent no. 3.

¶7

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

¶8

"(a) To, issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.2 to make an inquiry against the respondent no.3 with regard to missing of service book of petitioner and take necessary action against erring person within stipulated period as fixed by this Hon'ble Court.

¶9

(b) To, issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no.2 after providing the service book of petitioner given selection grade to the petitioner along with entire arrears.

¶10

(b) To, issue any other writ, order or direction, which this Hon'ble court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

¶11

(c) To, award the cost of petition in favour of the petitioner."

¶12

It is argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that wholly, illegally and with the conclusion of the respondent no. 3, the service book of the petitioner is missing. In this regard when the complaint was made by the petitioner an order dated 16.07.2019 was also passed by the District Basic Education Officer/respondent no. 2 by which directions were given by him to the Block Education Officer, Mohammadabad, District Gazipur to prepare a fresh service book of the petitioner in accordance with law, copy of the aforesaid letter dated 16.07.2019 is appended as Annexure-9 to the writ petition. It is further argued that inspite of the same, till date no action has been taken by the Block Education Officer on the same.

¶13

Without entering into the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction to respondent no. 2/District Basic

¶14

Education Officer, District Ghazipur, to complied with the letter dated 16.07.2019 written by respondent no. 2 in its letter and spirit within a period of one month from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶15

Order Date :- 9.12.2019 Swati

Ram Prakash Rai v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Prakash Rai 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

Firoj Akhtar Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others

Rameshwar Prasad Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Harilal Vs Settlement Officer Consolidation Azamgarh and 2 Others

Hari Shankar Verma Vs Settlement Officer of Consolidation and 8 Others

Ojasvi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Krishna Govind Rao Getha Vs Board of Revenue and 14 Others