Disposed

Ashutosh Pandey v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC5 Jul 2023WRIA/10454/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought promotion as Lecturer (Civics). Court dismissed petition without adjudicating merits on assumption that Regional Level Committee must first decide eligibility regarding sanctioned strength, incumbents, and compliance of rules. Liberty granted to approach committee.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to approach Regional Level Committee to decide the claim; Court did not adjudicate on merits.

Ashutosh Pandey Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:132362

¶2

Court No. - 35

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10454 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Ashutosh Pandey Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Awadhesh Kumar Malviya Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.

¶6

On oral request of learned counsel for the petitioner he is permitted to implead Regional Level Committee as a party.

¶7

Heard Sri Awadhesh Kumar Maliviya learned counsel for the writ petitioner and Sri Ajeet Kumar Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the respondents no. 1 to 3 and 5.

¶8

In view of the order which is being proposed to be passed today notices are not issued to respondent no. 4.

¶9

The case of the writ petitioner as worded in the writ petition is that the writ petitioner was appointed on the post of Assistant Teacher in the fourth respondent institution. As per the writ petitioner on 20.8.2020 the fourth respondent issued a notification for promotion on the post of Lecturer (Civics) under 50% quota.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is fully eligible and qualified in all respects and he is senior to other teachers. Reference has been made to para 7 of the writ petition so as to contend that Sri Om Prakash Singh has retired from the post of Lecturer (Civics) and on that basis the entire papers have been forwarded by the Principal of institution through the District Inspector of Schools on 8.9.2020. It is further the case of the writ petitioner that the District Inspector of Schools, Ghazipur has transmitted on the papers to the Joint Director of Education Varanasi Region, Varanasi on 11.4.2023 but till date no action whatsoever has been taken in this regard.

¶11

Prayer in the present petition is for a direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to consider the promotion of petitioner as Lecturer (Civics) under the 50% quota pursuant of the letter dated 11.4.2023 of the third respondent, District Inspector of Schools, Ghazipur.

¶12

Learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel submits that the issues which have been sought to be raised by the writ petitioner are to be dealt with by the Regional Level Committee at the first instance. According to learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel no fruitful purpose will be solved in detaining the writ petition on board and thus they do not propose to file any response to the writ petition however liberty be accorded to the writ petitioner to approach the Regional Level Committee while filing application along with self attested copy of the writ petition.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner has gracefully accepted the suggestion made by the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel.

¶14

Considering the submission of the rival parties as well as stand taken by them, the writ petition is being disposed of granting liberty to the writ petitioner to approach the fifth respondent, Regional Level Committee while filing a comprehensive application/representation along with self attested copy of the writ petition and on the receipt of the same the fifth respondent, Regional Level Committee shall proceed to decide the claim of the writ petitioner in accordance with law.

¶15

It is clarified at this stage that since the writ petition is being disposed off on an ex parte version without seeking any response from the respondents and the fourth respondent, Committee of Management is also not represented through its counsel before this Court.Thus the entire exercise is to be undertaken after putting the respondent no.4 to notice. The fifth respondent shall decide the entitlement of the writ petitioner after going through into the issue with regard to the sanctioned strength, the number of the incumbents manning the post, the entitlement, suitability, eligibility as well as the compliance of the Rules which are in vogue. The said exercise is to be completed within a period of three months from the date of production of the certified copy of this order.

¶16

Needless to point out that this court has not adjudicated the matter on the merits and the same is subject to legal impediment if any.

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 5.7.2023/piyush

¶19

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

Ashutosh Pandey v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashutosh Pandey 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr.Mayank Jain and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Ratna Shankar Pathak Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Arun Kumar Shahi and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ram Sagar Singh Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Prateek Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Kashi Nath Prasad Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others