Quashed

Shama Khatoon v. State of U.P. Thru. the Secy. Minority Welfare and Wakf ANUBHAG-3, Lucknow and 6 Others

Allahabad HC7 Mar 2024/1293/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed the order recalling financial approval and the order terminating the petitioner's services. The court held that both orders were passed ex parte without issuing necessary notices or providing an opportunity of hearing, rendering them vitiated.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the orders dated 25.09.2023 and 30.07.2023 with liberty to pass fresh orders after hearing.

Shama Khatoon Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Secy… — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:20931

¶2

Court No. - 17

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1293 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Shama Khatoon

¶5

Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. The Secy. Minority Welfare And Wakf Anubhag-3, Lucknow And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vinay Misra

¶6

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Afzal Ahmad Siddiqui

¶7

Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for petitioner, learned State Counsel for opposite parties 1 to 4 and 6, Mr. Afzal Ahmad Siddiqui, learned counsel for opposite party no.5, Mr. Ajmal Khan and Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocates, learned counsel for opposite party no.7.

¶9

Under challenge is the order dated 25.09.2023 passed by Registrar, U.P. Madarsa Shiksha Parishad whereby earlier order dated 08.10.2015 granting financial approval to petitioner's appointment has been recalled. Also under challenge is order dated 30.07.2023 passed by the Manager of the Institution terminating petitioner's services.

¶10

It has been submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that petitioner was earlier appointed as Assistant Teacher in the opposite party no. 7 Institution whereafter financial approval was accorded vide order dated 08.10.2015 but subsequently salary was stopped vide order dated 18.03.2020 which was challenged in Writ-A No. 3434 of 2023 which was allowed vide order dated 24.05.2023 directing opposite parties to ensure payment of salary to petitioner along with arrears. It was also directed that since petitioner has not been terminated from service, she was entitled to get salary on a monthly basis. It is submitted that no special appeal has been filed by the opposite parties against said directions.

¶11

It appears that in the earlier Writ-A No. 3434 of 2023 filed by petitioner, directions were issued to ensure payment of salary to petitioner primarily on ground that her services were not terminated and therefore she was entitled for salary. Contempt Application (Civil) No. 3070 of 2023 was thereafter filed and dismissed vide order dated 28.10.2023 due to passing of order dated 25.09.2023 which is under challenge.

¶12

Upon perusal of the impugned order dated 25.09.2023, it is quite evident that the same has been passed on an apparent complaint made by one Yusuf Farooqui against petitioner. The order indicates the complaint in detail along with various other factors but is completely silent with regard to issuance of notice to petitioner and affording any opportunity of hearing to her. Similar is the situation with regard to the other impugned order dated 30.07.2023.

¶13

It is quite evident that orders impugned have been passed on an ex parte basis and are therefore vitiated due to which the aforesaid impugned orders dated 25.09.2023 and 30.07.2023 are hereby quashed by issuance of writ in the nature of Certiorari granting liberty to opposite parties to pass fresh orders in accordance with directions issued by this Court earlier which have attained finality and only after affording opportunity of hearing to petitioner.

¶14

In view of aforesaid, the petition succeeds and is allowed at the admission stage itself. Parties to bear their own cost.

¶15

Order Date :- 7.3.2024 kvg/-

¶16

Digitally signed by :- GIREESAN KV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Shama Khatoon v. State of U.P. Thru. the Secy. Minority Welfare and Wakf ANUBHAG-3, Lucknow and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shama Khatoon v. State of U.P. Thru. the Secy. Minority Welfare and Wakf ANUBHAG-3, Lucknow and 6 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

Sunjeet Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Rural Development Deptt. and 6 Others

Smt. Smriti Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Basic Education Deptt. Lucknow and 5 Others

Nisha Srivastava Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy./ Chairman, U.P. State Bridge Corporation Ltd. Lko and 3 Others

Ram Sajivan vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./ Prin. Secy., Public Works Deptt. Lko and 3 Others

Sitabun Nisha vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Basic Education Deptt. Lko. and 4 Others

Brijesh Tripathi vs Aryavart Bank Thru. Its Chairman Lko. and 4 Others