Allowed

Om Prakash v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Secondary Edu. Lko and 4 Others

Allahabad HC29 May 2024/1037/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench quashed an order dated 12-10-2023 by the Regional Level Committee regarding a teacher's appointment/compensation, as it was passed without mandatory reports. The matter was remitted for a fresh order within three months adhering to Section 33-G.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 12-10-2023 is quashed. The matter is remitted to the Regional Level Committee to pass a fresh order within three months.

Om Prakash Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:40925

¶2

Court No. - 20

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1037 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Om Prakash

¶5

Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Secondary Edu. Lko And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Harsha Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶6

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Pradeep Kumar Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶8

By means of instant writ petition, the petitioner has sought a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 12-102023 passed by the opposite party no. 2.

¶9

Ground of challenge is that without calling the report from the Committee of Management as well as the detailed report from the District Inspector of Schools, the impugned order has been passed in a cursory manner. She added that the petitioner is working since the year 1998 and is getting salary since the year 1998.

¶10

Further contention is that this court in an identical matter, has passed the Judgment and order on 17-05-2024, in Writ A No. 8517 of 2023, alongwith other connected matters and thus, the present petitioner is also entitled for the same relief.

¶11

When a query is put to the learned counsel for the State, he submits that from perusal of the impugned order, it's evident that the report from the Committee of Management is not observed by the Regional Level Committee, though, he has opposed that after the detailed discussion, the impugned order has been passed by Regional Level Committee.

¶12

Considering upon the submissions of learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it emerges that the Regional Level Committee has erred, while not calling the report from the Committee of Management, though the issue at the inception stage, is that the appointment is done by the Committee of Management itself, and the Committee of Management is best source regarding papers/records of the appointment, though the same has mandatorily not been called

¶13

upon by the Regional Level Committee.

¶14

This court has also noticed the fact that the report of the District Inspector of Schools is taken into consideration, but, it primafacie, seems that the same is not in a detailed manner.

¶15

Since, it is matter, where the career of a teacher is on stake, and therefore, the order could not have been passed in a cursory manner by the Regional Level Committee. Therefore, the impugned order dated 12-10-2023 is hereby quashed.

¶16

The matter is remitted back to the Regional Level Committee concerned to pass a fresh order, in the light of the Judgment and Order dated 17-05-2024 passed by this court in Writ A No. 8517 of 2023 within period of three months from the date, a certified copy of this order is produced before it.

¶17

While passing the order, the Regional Level Committee shall strictly adhere to the scheme provided under section 33-G of the Uttar Pradesh Secondary Education(Service Selection Boards) Act,1982.

¶18

In addition, it is further provided that the petitioner is entitled to continue in service and will be paid salary without any further break subject to the decision, taken by the Regional Level Committee.

¶19

The petitioner as well as the manager of the Committee of Management are also directed to extend their cooperation to the Regional Level Committee, with respect to hearing of the matter.

¶20

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is allowed at the admission stage.

¶21

Order Date :- 29.5.2024 Lokesh Kumar

¶22

Digitally signed by :- LOKESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Om Prakash v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Secondary Edu. Lko and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Om Prakash v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Secondary Edu. Lko and 4 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Raj Chaudhary vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lok Bhawan Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Saddam @ Saddam Husain and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Zeba Faizan Alias Jeba vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt., Lko. and Anothers

Sita Jaiswal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Cooperative Lko and 2 Others

Om Prakash vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Secondary Edu. Lko and 4 Others

Dr. Rahul Agarwal @ Rahul Agarwal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Medical Health and Family Welfare Lko. and 3 Others