C/M Shri Bhuwal Smarak Sanskrit Mahavidyalay Ghaghara Latghat Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:134845

Court No. - 35

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10018 of 2023

Petitioner :- C/M Shri Bhuwal Smarak Sanskrit Mahavidyalay Ghaghara Latghat Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Dadhi Bal Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Shesh Kumar Srivastava

¶5

Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Dadhi Bal Yadav learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent No. 1 to 4 and Sri Dev Kaushik, (AOR No.A/D0127/18), holding brief of Sri Shesh Kumar Srivastava, for respondent no.5.

¶7

The facts of the case as worded for the writ petition are that the petitioner no.1 claims to be a committee of management and the writ petition has been filed through its Manager who has in paragraph 3 averred that the said society has been granted registration on 7.1.2020 for a period of five years and the office bearers have also approved by the Assistant Registrar Firms, Society and for the year 2022-23.

¶8

In paragraph 6 of the writ petition it has been asserted that the institution in recognized by the Board of Secondary (Sanskrit) Education U.P. at Lucknow and affiliated with the respondent no.5 University and as per the sanctioned strength as depicted in paragraph 7 there is one post of Principal and four post of Assistant Teacher.

¶9

In para 10 of the writ petition it has been averred that once a Substantive Post of Assistant Teacher is lying vacant consequent to retirement of one Sri Ram Charan Singh, Assistant Teacher and thus proceedings were drawn by the petitioner institution for making selection and according permission in that regard.

¶10

In various paragraphs of the writ petition it has been averred that despite the fact that the writ petitioner has represented the matter before the Educational Authority in particular fourth respondent District Inspector of Schools, Azamgarh, District Azamgarh but no action whatsoever has been taken in this regard.

¶11

Prayer in the present petition is for a mandamus directing the fourth respondent to give permission to fill up the substantive vacancy of Assistant Teacher which is fell vacant due to the retirement of one Sri Ram Charan Singh.

¶12

Learned Standing Counsel as well as learned counsel appearing for the Universities on the other hand submit that the issue as to whether the writ petitioner committee of management is entitled to fill up vacancy and approval is to be granted or not is a issue which is to be at the very first instance liable to be addressed by the fourth respondent. It is further submitted that since the writ petitioner has represented the matter before the fourth respondent thus the fourth respondent be directed to pass a reasoned order while taking a conscious decision in that regard.

¶13

To such a submission of learned counsel for the petitioner has no objection and he has gracefully accepted the same.

¶14

Considering the submissions of the rival parties as well as the stand taken by them, the writ petition is being disposed off without seeking any response from the respondents granting liberty to the writ petitioner to prefer a comprehensive application along with the self attested copy of the writ petition and on the receipt of the same before the respondent shall advert to the core issue with regard to the following aspects:-

¶15

a. sanctioned strength;

¶16

b. number of vacancy;

¶17

c. issue as to to whether approval has to be granted in the light of the statutory provision governing the field; and

¶18

d. ancillary aspects and pass a reasoned and speaking order within a period of three months from the date of the production of the certified copy of the order;

¶19

Needless to point out that the writ petition is being decided on an ex parte version without seeking any response from the respondents thus passing of this order may not be construed to be an expression that this Court has gone into the merits of the matter.

¶20

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed off .

¶21

Order Date :- 7.7.2023/piyush

¶22

Digitally signed by :- PIYUSH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

C/M Shri Bhuwal Smarak Sanskrit Mahavidyalay Ghaghara Latghat v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C/M Shri Bhuwal Smarak Sanskrit Mahavidyalay Ghaghara Latghat v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Ram Sahay Sharma Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Jagdeesh Prasad Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Nandini Shukla Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Anand Pal Singh Vs District Inspector of Schools and 3 Others

Jai Shankar Rai Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Sukhvir Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others