Allowed

C/M Shaheed Mangal Pandey Inter College and Another v. State of U P and 5 Others

Allahabad HC15 Nov 2019WRIC/18058/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order addressed a motion to implead the Principal of the college as a respondent before allowing a writ petition. The writ petition challenged a supersession order passed without an opportunity of hearing and relying on unsupplied reports. The court set aside the supersession order.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed; order dated 10.5.2019 set aside; respondent directed to pass fresh order after furnishing reports and granting hearing within one month.

C/M Shaheed Mangal Pandey Inter College and… — Education and Admissions | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 54

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 18058 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- C/M Shaheed Mangal Pandey Inter College And Another Respondent :- State Of U P And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vijay Kumar Singh,Om Prakash Ojha,Prabhakar Awasthi,Sankalp Narain Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Rakesh Kumar Pandey,Sandeep Kumar Rai

¶4

Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.

¶5

Order on Civil Misc. Impleadment Application No. of 2019.

¶6

The present impleadment application has been filed to implead Ravi Rai, Principal of Shaheed Mangal Pandey Inter College as respondent no. 7 in the array of the parties.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioner has no objection to the impleadment of the applicant Ravi Rai.

¶8

The impleadment application is allowed. Petitioner is permitted to implead Ravi Rai as respondent no. 7 during the course of the day.

¶9

Order on Writ Petition

¶10

Heard Sri G.K. Singh, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Om Prakash Ojha, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri Rakesh Kumar Pandey, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Prabhakar Awasthi, and Sri Chandan Sharma holding brief of Sri Sandeep Kumar Rai, for newly impleaded respondent no. 7 and learned Standing Counsel appears for respondent no. 1 to 4.

¶11

The petitioner is a committee of management of Shaheed Mangal Pandey Inter College Nagwa Ballia and has assailed the order dated 10.5.2019 passed by the Joint Secretary (Sanskrit Shiksha Anubhag) Government of U.P. Lucknow- respondent no. 2 superseding the committee of management by invoking power under Section 16(D)(4) of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 (hereinafter referred as 'Act, 1921').

¶12

It appears that earlier also the respondent no. 2 passed an order on 20.9.2018 superseding the petitioner's committee of management which was challenged by the petitioner by means of Writ - C No. 35987 of 2018. The aforesaid writ petition was allowed by this Court by judgment and order dated 2.11.2018

¶13

and remanded the matter back to the respondent no. 2 to pass fresh order. Thereafter, the then Joint Secretary Sandhya Tiwari, fixed 30.11.2018 for hearing the matter. The petitioner appeared and submitted his reply on the said date. However, in the meantime, Smt. Sandhya Tiwari, had retired on 31st December, 2018 and the matter was posted before new incumbent Shatrunjay Kumar Singh, Joint Secretary. The new incumbent Shatrunjay Kumar Singh, Joint Secretary passed the order on 10.5.2019 again superseding the petitioner's committee of management.

¶14

The aforesaid order has been assailed by the petitioner on the ground that no opportunity of hearing was afforded by new incumbent before passing the order dated 10.5.2019. The further submission is that the order impugned relies upon two reports of the Director dated 8.1.2019 and 24.4.2019, but these two reports have not been supplied to the petitioner and hence, the order impugned has been passed in violation of principles of natural justice and as such is not sustainable in law. The necessary averments with regard to violation of principles of natural justices has been stated by the petitioner in paragraph nos. 68, 69 and 72 of the writ petition.

¶15

In the aforesaid backdrop, this Court directed the learned Standing Counsel to seek instructions in the matter.

¶16

On instruction, learned Standing Counsel Sri Bimla Prasad, submits that the averments of the petitioner that the petitioner has not been afforded any opportunity of hearing by the new incumbent and the two reports of the Director dated 8.1.2019 and 24.4.2019 relied upon by the respondent no. 2 for passing the impugned order has also not been supplied to the petitioner are correct.

¶17

Since, the respondent-State has not disputed the fact that the two reports of the Director dated 8.1.2019 and 24.4.2019 relied upon the respondent no. 2 in passing the impugned order has not been supplied to the petitioner and further, opportunity of hearing was not afforded to the petitioner by the new incumbent namely Shatrunjay Kumar Singh before passing the impugned order. This Court finds substance in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner. Hence, the impugned order cannot be sustained and is accordingly set-aside.

¶18

The writ petition is allowed with liberty to the respondent no. 2 to pass a fresh order after supplying two reports of the Director dated 8.1.2019 and 24.4.2019 and after giving proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The aforesaid exercise shall be completed by the respondent no. 2 within a period of

¶19

one month from the date of a production of certified copy of the order.

¶20

The writ petition is allowed subject to the observations made above.

¶21

Order Date :- 15.11.2019 Ishan

C/M Shaheed Mangal Pandey Inter College and Another v. State of U P and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C/M Shaheed Mangal Pandey Inter College and Another v. State of U P and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sushma Kumari and 5 Others Vs State of U P and 3 Others

Gorang Tyagi Vs Swami Vivekanand Subharti University Meerut and 2 Others

Siddharth Yadaw Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

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

Suman Kumari Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Krishna Kant Pathak Vs State of U P and 4 Others