Disposed

Manjula Rani Jauhar v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC20 May 2019WRIA/7965/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner claimed arrears of salary in a government school. At the admission stage, the writ petition was disposed of by directing the respondent to consider a fresh representation within two weeks and pass a reasoned order within three months.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to submit fresh representation; respondent directed to pass reasoned order within three months.

Manjula Rani Jauhar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 29

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 7965 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Manjula Rani Jauhar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sunil Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Santosh Kumar

¶4

Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Sunil Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent no. 1 and Sri Santosh Kumar, learned counsel for respondent nos. 2 and 3.

¶6

It is contented by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in terms of the advertisement dated 26.6.1994 the petitioner was appointed in Smt.Subhadra Vidyalaya, Jalalabad, Shahjahanpur on probation of one year. Approval was granted by the District Basic Eduction Officer Shahjahanpur/respondent no. 2 for a period of six months vide order dated 12.11.1984. Subsequently another appointment letter was issued to the petitioner on ad hoc basis for six month.

¶7

In this regard petitioner earlier filed writ petition before this Court being Writ A No. 5963 of 1985 (Smt. Manjula Rani Vs. B.S.A. and others). The aforesaid writ petition was finally allowed by the co-ordinate Bench of this court vide judgment and order dated 19.11.2014. A copy of the said order is appended as Annexure-1 to the writ petition.

¶8

It is contented by learned counsel for the petitioner that from the date of initial appointment petitioner is working regularly in the institution in question and getting her salary but the salary for brief periods i.e. for July 2010, September, 2010, NNovember, 2010, December, 2010, January, 2011, February, 2011 and again for the period from September, 2013 to January, 2014 was not paid to the petitioner for which she is legally entitled in view of the judgment and order dated 19.11.2014 passed in the writ petition filed by the petitioner herself. In this regard the petitioner has also made presentation addressed to the respondent no. 2, a copy of this is appended along with the writ petition but no decision has been taken till date.

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the parties. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties this writ petition is

¶10

disposed of finally at the admission stage itself.

¶11

In the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice the petitioner is directed to submit fresh representation ventilating all his grievances, along with a certified copy of this order before the respondent no. 2- District Basic Eduction Officer, Shahjahanpur within a period of two week from today. In the event such a representation is made, the respondent no. 2 is directed to pass a reasoned speaking order on the said representation within a period of three months thereafter.

¶12

With the aforesaid observations, this writ petition stands disposed of.

¶13

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the case and the authority concern shall pass order independently, in accordance with law. Order Date :- 20.5.2019 M.A.Ansari

Manjula Rani Jauhar v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manjula Rani Jauhar 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shazer Malik Vs State of U.P. and Others

Raghunath Bharti Vs State of U.P. and Others

Pawan Kumar Singh and Others Vs State of U.P. and Others

Vijay Kumar and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Madhu Pandey and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Rekha Mishra Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others