Dismissed

Priya Kant @ Priya Kant Tiwari v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Technical Education, Lucknow and Others

Allahabad HC26 Nov 2024/9935/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, a former manager of an educational institution, filed a writ petition commanding an enquiry into alleged fraud, forgery, and manipulation to obtain registration by the institution. The Court observed that an enquiry had already been conducted by the District Magistrate based on complaints, resulting in a recommendation against further recognition of the institute, holding that the grie

What the court decided

AI extract

Priya Kant @ Priya Kant Tiwari Vs State of U.P… — Education and Admissions | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:78255

¶2

Court No. - 8

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 9935 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Priya Kant @ Priya Kant Tiwari Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Technical Education, Lucknow And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shitesh Jha,Dr. Shailendra Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ravi Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Notice on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 6 has been accepted by the office of Chief Standing Counsel. Shri Ravi Singh, learned counsel has put in appearance on behalf of respondent No.8.

¶7

By means of the instant petition, the petitioner prays for the following main relief:-

¶8

"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus thereby commanding and directing the opposite parties to conduct the fair, proper and detailed enquiry in the present case regarding the fraud, forgery and manipulation done by the opposite party no.7. The opposite party No.7 have submitted the forged documents for granting the recognition of D.Pharma and also committed manipulation for granting the same and submitting the enquiry report and take appropriate action within a period as fixed by this Hon'ble Court, in the interest of justice."

¶9

At the outset, a specific query was put to learned counsel for the petitioner as to how the petitioner has the locus standi to maintain the instant petition, to which it has been answered by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was an erstwhile Manager in respondent No.7-Institution. It is further submitted that certain recognition and approvals have been obtained by respondent No.7 without disclosing the correct facts and the same was outcome of fraud. It is further urged that the petitioner escalated the matter by filing the complaints before the appropriate authority and since appropriate action has not been taken, hence, the petitioner has approached this Court claiming the relief.

¶10

Having taken note of the relief as well as the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court finds that upon the complaints already an action has been taken, a copy of which has been brought on record as Annexure No.7 to the writ petition. There is a letter dated 26.02.2024 addressed to the petitioner along with a letter dated 14.02.2024 indicating that an enquiry was got conducted by the District Magistrate and thereafter a specific entry/recommendation has already been

¶11

made that the institute has not been recommended further for any educational activities.

¶12

Considering the aforesaid, this Court does not find that there is any merit in the petition, inasmuch as the grievance raised by the petitioner has already been taken care of.

¶13

Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed .

¶14

Order Date :- 26.11.2024 Ashutosh

¶15

Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Priya Kant @ Priya Kant Tiwari v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Technical Education, Lucknow and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Priya Kant @ Priya Kant Tiwari v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Technical Education, Lucknow and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Jkm Infra Projects Limited, through its Authorized Representative, Sri Abhishek Kumar Jha vs Superintending Engineer, Indo Nepal Border Circle, U.P. Public Welfare Deptt. Barabanki and Others

Anshika Bajpai vs Akhilesh Tiwari

National Fertilizers Limited, Lko. Thru. Its State Manager (Bihar) vs Dilip Kumar Shrivastava

Shiv Raj Pal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue, Lucknow and Others

Momina Vs the Learned Court of Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Patti, Pratapgarh and Others

Ismail Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt., Revenue Deptt., Lucknow and Others