Disposed

Nikhil Kumar v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC27 May 2019WRIA/8307/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A petition for compassionate appointment was rejected by the Basic Education Officer as the deceased worked at an upgraded Intermediate school. The High Court directed transmission of papers to the District Inspector of Schools for consideration by the Committee under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921.

What did the court decide?

Directed transmission of papers to the District Inspector of Schools, Kanpur Dehat, for consideration by the Committee under Regulation 105 of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 Regulations.

Nikhil Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 19

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 8307 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Nikhil Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Yogesh Kumar Saxena Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Akhilesh Chandra Srivastava,Pankaj Kumar Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Gupta,J.

¶5

The petitioner after death of his father on 20.02.2018 while inharness as Assistant Teacher in Vivekanand Junior High School, Kasolar, Kanur Dehat, Auraiya is claiming compassionate appointment.

¶6

The Basic Education Officer by impugned order dated 25.03.2019 has observed that the the institution was upgraded to High School Level by order dated 06.02.1990 and to Intermediate level with vitvihin approval on 17.03.1999.

¶7

In such circumstances, guidance has been sought in the matter from Additional Director of Education Basic. The representations made by the petitioner for being given compassionate appointment dated 28.12.2018, 22.01.2019 and 12.03.2019 have been rejected.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the District Basic Education Officer would have no power to grant compassionate appointment after the upgradation of the institution to High School level and then to Intermediate Level, inasmuch as, the institution is now governed by the provisions of U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921. He has placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in the case of Manju Awasthi and others Vs. State of U.P. and others 2013 (3) ADJ 64 , in support of his contention.

¶9

Learned counsel for the District Basic Education Officer Sri Pankaj Kumar Singh does not dispute the above legal proposition nor Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State respondents.

¶10

Accordingly, the third respondent is directed to transmit the papers relating to prayer made by the petitioner for grant of compassionate appointment to the District Inspector of Schools, Kanpur Dehat, the fourth respondent, within three weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶11

The fourth respondent, shall thereafter, proceed to call for such other information as he may require and thereafter place the matter for consideration by the Committee envisaged under Chapter III Regulation 105 of the Regulations framed under U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921. The said Committee would take decision within next two months.

¶12

The petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶13

(Manoj Kumar Gupta, J.)

¶14

Order Date :- 27.5.2019 M. ARIF

Nikhil Kumar v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nikhil Kumar v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr. Gangeshwar Prasad Vs State of U P and 3 Others

Surendra Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Bhagwati Prasad and Another Vs State of U.P. through Its Principal Secretary Intermidiate Education, Lucknow and 6 Others

Purushottam Singh Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Swayambar Singh Vs State of U P and 3 Others

Ganesh Singh Vs District Inspector of Schools, Sambhal, and 3 Others