Disposed

Jitendra Singh v. State of U.P. and Others

Allahabad HC25 Jan 2019WRIA/5194/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court directed the Regional Assistant Director of Education (Basic), Allahabad, to consider the petitioner's claim for payment of salaries from the grant-in-aid period within three months, following a communication highlighting the delay in the matter's adjudication.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner confined relief to directing Respondent No. 2 to consider the claim and pass appropriate orders within three months.

Jitendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and Others — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 18

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5194 of 2010 Petitioner :- Jitendra Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- V.K. Singh,G.K. Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ravi Shanker Prasad

¶3

Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.

¶4

Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶6

The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition with a prayer to issue mandamus directing the respondents authorities to include the name of the petitioner in the list of teachers, who were brought under grant-in-aid list w.e.f. 1.12.2006. Further prayer was made in the writ petition to issue a mandamus directing the respondents to make payment of salary to the petitioner regularly along-with arrears w.e.f. 1.12.2006.

¶7

The facts in brief as contended in the writ petition are that there is a institution namely Jagdambika Junior High School, Itauli Vikas Khand Hathgam, District Fatehpur. The institution in question is duly recognized Junior High School and the same is governed by the provisions contained in the U.P. Basic Education Act, 1972 and Regulations framed thereunder. The institution was granted permanent recognition w.e.f. 29.9.1984.

¶8

The petitioner was initially appointed in the institution in question after following the procedure prescribed in the Act vide appointment letter dated 22.1.2001. The aforesaid appointment letter was issued to the petitioner pursuant to letter of approval dated 12.12.2000 issued by the District Basic Education Officer, Fatehpur. From the date of initial appointment the petitioner was working regularly without any break. The institution in question was brought under the grant-in-aid list in December, 2006. The Committee of Management forwarded the list of teachers and employees, who were working in the institution. Since the petitioner was already working hence in the said list name of the

¶9

petitioner found place at serial number 9. Subsequently, District Basic Education Officer, Fatehpur, issued a list granting financial sanction to the teachers and employees but in the said list name of the petitioner was not mentioned.

¶10

It is contended in paragraph 12 of the writ petition that the objection, which was raised against the petitioner was that the petitioner has obtained B.P.Ed degree and as such he is not entitled for the payment of his salary. The petitioner in paragraph 13 of the writ petition referred a government order dated 21.5.1979. Apart from same, government order dated 23.8.2007 was also contained in the writ petition as annexure 8 to the writ petition.

¶11

Since salary was not paid to the petitioner, Committee of Management represented the matter before the educational authorities giving details with a request to make the payment of salary to the petitioner from the State exchequer. In this background of the matter when the salary was not paid, the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition.

¶12

When the writ petition was filed a counter affidavit was called for. The affidavits have already been exchanged between the contesting parties.

¶13

Today when the matter was taken up the supplementary affidavit was filed on behalf of the petitioner. It is contended in the said affidavit that during the pendency of the writ petition a subsequent development was taken place. Since the petitioner was not paid salary, he submitted a complaint being complaint No.15172170045149 and the same was lodged before the concerned competent authority. Looking into the complaint made by the petitioner a letter dated 25.8.2017 was written by the District Basic Education Officer, Fatehpur to the Chief Officer (complaint), Collectorate, District Fatehpur. The copy of the said communication dated 25.8.2017 is appended as annexure no.S.A.-1 to the supplementary affidavit. In the said communication it was contended by the District Basic Education Officer, Fatehpur, that the matter pertaining to the payment of the salary to the petitioner is pending

¶14

consideration before the Regional Assistant Director of Education, Allahabad.

¶15

In view of the same, the petitioner has confined his relief in the present case only to the extent to direct the respondent no.2 namely Regional Assistant Director of Education (Basic), Allahabad to consider the claim of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders.

¶16

In the facts and circumstances of the case, the respondent no.2/Regional Assistant Director of Education (Basic), Allahabad Region, Allahabad, is directed to look into the matter and pass appropriate order in terms of the communication being letter no.4614-15/2017-18 dated 25.8.2017 (copy of which is appended as S.A. 1 to the supplementary affidavit) within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 25.1.2019 Pramod Tripathi

Jitendra Singh v. State of U.P. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jitendra Singh v. State of U.P. and 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

Brijendra Kumar Shukla and 7 Others Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Ghan Shyam Mishra Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Kavita Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

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

Ramdatt Singh Yadav Vs State of U.P and 5 Others

Sangeeta Rani Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others