Dismissed

Chanda Singh and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC19 Jan 2021SPLAD/36/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Special appeal challenging a Single Judge's order dismissing a writ petition regarding denial of service renewal to part-time instructors was dismissed. The High Court found that renewal depended on student strength criteria established in the relevant Government Order, and the appeal failed due to laches.

What did the court decide?

Special appeal dismissed; single Judge's judgment dated 07.12.2020 upheld.

Chanda Singh and Another Vs State of U.P… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 40

¶2

Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 36 of 2021

¶3

Appellant :- Chanda Singh And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Yadvendra Pratap Singh,Sanjai Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Mrigraj Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Munishwar Nath Bhandari,J. Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.

¶5

(Civil Misc. Exemption Application)

¶6

Heard.

¶7

This exemption application is allowed.

¶8

(Order on Memo of Appeal)

¶9

By this special appeal, a challenge is made to the judgment dated 07.12.2020 passed by learned Single Judge, whereby the writ petition preferred by the appellant-petitioners for challenge to the order dated 22/23.08.2017 was dismissed.

¶10

It is a case where the appellant-petitioners were appointed as Part-Time Instructor pursuant to the Government Order dated 31.03.2013. The service of the appellant-petitioners was renewed thereupon. The renewal was denied thereupon by the order dated 22/23.08.2017. The perusal of the order shows that the renewal of service of the appellant-petitioners was made depended on the strength of the students. It was made clear that if the strength of the students exceeds to 100, the service of the appellant-petitioners would be renewed. The said order was not challenged by the appellant-petitioners immediately but with laps of three years, thus the writ petition was dismissed on the ground of laches. We do not otherwise find any illegality in the order dated 22/23.08.2017.

¶11

The renewal of the service of the Part-Time Instructor is not automatic but on necessary consideration therefore even the judgment of this Court in Special

¶12

Appeal Defective No.414 of 2019 (Sarita & 7 Others Vs. State of U.P. & 4 Others) decided on 14.05.2019, would not apply. In the case of Sarita (Supra), the consideration for renewal was not made, thus appropriate direction was given while in the instant case the consideration for renewal of term was made and denied for the reasons given in the affidavit.

¶13

Taking into consideration, the nature of appointment and the fact that even pursuant to the Government Order dated 31.03.2013, the consideration of renewal was made, thus no reason exists to cause interference in the judgment passed by learned Single Judge.

¶14

Accordingly, the present special appeal fails to stand and is dismissed.

¶15

Order Date :- 19.1.2021 A.Dewal

Chanda Singh and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chanda Singh and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 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

Praveen Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

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

Ram Bhawan Yadav and 18 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Arti Gautam Vs State of U.P. and 8 Others

Ashutosh Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Yogesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another