Remanded

Pratima Bharti v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Basic Education Deptt. Basic Education Govt. Lko. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC22 Apr 2024/3082/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge writ petition challenged the rejection of the petitioner's claim. The Allahabad High Court directd the competent authority to reconsider the case in light of the Apex Court judgment in Rahul Kumar v. State of U.P. within two months, ignoring the previous rejection order.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Secretary, U.P. Basic Education Board, Prayagraj, to reconsider the petitioner's case in light of the Apex Court judgment in Rahul Kumar v. State of U.P. within two months.

Pratima Bharti Vs State of U.P. Thru… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:31165

¶2

Court No. - 20

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3082 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Pratima Bharti

¶5

Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Basic Education Deptt. Basic Education Govt. Lko. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Piyush Pathak,Sharad Pathak Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Prashant Kumar Singh,Ran Vijay Singh

¶6

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶7

Heard Sri Sharad Pathak, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Sanjeev Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the opposite parties no. 1, 2 and 4, Sri Ran Vijay Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 3 and Sri Prashant Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 5.

¶8

A challenge is made to the order dated 28.03.2021, passed by the opposite party no. 5, whereby the claim of the petitioner has been rejected.

¶9

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the controversy in question has been settled by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Rahul Kumar Vs. State of U.P. and Others (Writ Petition (Civil) No. 378 of 2021 . He also added that the Division Bench of this court while considering the ratio in the Judgment of Rahul Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Others(Supra), has passed an order on 08-12-2023, in Special Appeal Defective No. 931 of 2023, wherein, in the identical circumstances, the matter was referred/remitted back for reconsideration before the authority concerned. Further submitted that in the identically situated person namely Nisha Shukla, an order was passed by the opposite parties on 14-032024, while affording the benefit of the ratio of the Judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Rahul Kumar Vs. State of U.P. and Others(Supra).

¶10

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the opposite parties nos. 3 and 5 has no objection to the contentions aforesaid.

¶11

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of material placed on records, the competent authority/opposite party no. 3 i.e. Secretary, U.P. Basic Education Board, Prayagraj, is hereby directed to consider and

¶12

decide the case of the petitioner in the light of directions passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Rahul Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Others (Writ Petition (Civil) No. 378 of 2021(Supra) and inter alia, by this court in Jubeda Bano's Case (Special Appeal No. 69 of 2022), within a period of two months from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him, ignoring the impugned order dated 28.03.2021, so far as it relates to the present petitioner.

¶13

With the aforesaid observations, the instant writ petition is disposed of .

¶14

Order Date :- 22.4.2024 Anurag, PS Gr-I

¶15

Digitally signed by :- ANURAG SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Pratima Bharti v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Basic Education Deptt. Basic Education Govt. Lko. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pratima Bharti v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Basic Education Deptt. Basic Education Govt. 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Shanti Devi Jain Degree College, Muzaffarnagar Thru. Manager Subhash Jain Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Higher Education, Lucknow and Others

Rajesh Kumar Vs Managing Director U.P. Jal Nigam (Nagriya) Lko. and 3 Others

Dr. Avinash Kumar Yadav and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Medical Education and Training, Lucknow and Others

Iqbal Ahmad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy., Deptt. Social Welfare Lko. and 4 Others

Ram Kali Kanya Vidyalaya Samiti Sultanpur Thru. Manager and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Institutinal Finance Lko. and 2 Others

Meenu Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Basic Education and 3 Others