Disposed

Yogendra Singh v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Allahabad HC3 Nov 2022WRIA/17034/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging the attachment of an Assistant Teacher. While rejecting the complaint-based justification for punishment due to lack of inquiry, the court upheld the attachment pending a fresh hearing on administrative grounds within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent no. 4 to decide the petition on merits within two weeks after hearing the Committee of Management.

Yogendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 36 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17034 of 2022 Petitioner :- Yogendra Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pramod Kumar Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Hritudhwaj Pratap Sahi,Krishna Kumar Chand,Sankalp Narain

¶2

Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.

¶3

Heard Shri Pramod Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner; Shri Srivats Narain, Advocate, holding brief of Shri Sankalp Narain, learned counsel for private respondent and; Shri Ajay Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel.

¶4

Present petition has been filed to challenge the order dated 7.10.2022 passed by the respondent no.4/District Inspector of Schools, Aligarh whereby the petitioner who is working as an Assistant Teacher (Science) at O.P. Mittal Inter College, Khair, Aligarh, has been attached to Government Inter College, Pairai, Aligarh. Perusal of that order reveals, the petitioner has been attached to the aforesaid institution as an interim measure keeping in mind the student teacher ratio.

¶5

On earlier occasion, written instructions were called from the State. Those reveal, other than the student teacher ratio, the impugned order is occasioned by certain complaints made by the officiating Principal and continued refusal on part of the petitioner to take up the duties of the class teacher being assigned to him.

¶6

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, insofar as the State seeks to defend the impugned order on the strength of complaints, that line of reasoning offered by the State cannot sustain. If the order is punitive in nature, it would have to be preceded by proper enquiry. The punishment order in the shape of attachment order cannot arise, except in accordance with law. Only upon enquiry

¶7

conducted and completed, the order in the nature of the punishment can be handed out to the petitioner.

¶8

However, as to the other aspect which is narrated in the impugned order itself, the facts are yet not clear. The written instructions indicate, there are four science teachers at O.P. Mittal Inter College, Khair, Aligarh. Also, number of science students have been mentioned in the written instructions. Thus, it has been contended, student teacher ratio is lopsided or much in favour of the teachers. Therefore, the petitioner has been attached.

¶9

In view of the above, writ petition is disposed of with a direction, in case, the petitioner files a proper representation before respondent no. 4 supported by his personal affidavit annexing relevant documents he seeks to rely within a period of two weeks from today, that representation may be decided on its own merits. Thus, it is left open to the petitioner to plead that he need not to be transferred or attached to the another institution for reason of student teacher ratio. If such facts are pleaded by the petitioner, respondent no.4 shall apply its mind and shall pass appropriate and reasoned order within a period of two weeks therefrom, after hearing the Committee of Management.

¶10

For a period of four weeks or till the decision of the respondent no.2, whichever is earlier, the petitioner would continue to be attached at Government Inter College, Pairai, Aligarh. It is made clear, the order to be passed by the DIOS may be occasioned by administrative considerations and not for reason of certain complaints. It is open to the management to proceed into those complaints if warranted in the facts of the present case.

¶11

Order Date :- 3.11.2022 Prakhar

¶12

Digitally signed by PRAKHAR SRIVASTAVA Date: 2022.11.04 10:33:17 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Yogendra Singh v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yogendra Singh 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dilip Kumar Prajapati and Another Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Kamlesh Agrawal Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

C/M Saraswati Inter College Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Raj Pal Singh Chauhan Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Amit Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

C/M of Khalsa Inter College and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others