Dismissed

Smt. Saroj Nishad v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Basic Education Deptt. Lko. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC1 Aug 2024WRIA/6022/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought direction to continue as Shiksha Mitra after resignation and reselection as Assistant Teacher. Court found the scheme discontinued since 2010 and resignation accepted in 2020. Petition dismissed for lack of occasion to intervene.

What did the court decide?

None granted. Petition dismissed at admission stage.

What the court decided

Smt. Saroj Nishad vs State of U.P. Thru… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:52538

¶2

Court No. - 18

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6022 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Smt. Saroj Nishad Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Basic Education Deptt. Lko. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- O.P. Tiwari,Aman Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Abhinav Singh,Dilip Kumar Pandey,Ran Vijay Singh,Sarvesh Kumar Dubey

¶5

Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for petitioner, learned State Counsel for opposite party no.1, Mr. Ran Vijay Singh, learned counsel for opposite party no.2, Mr. Sarvesh Dubey, learned counsel for opposite party no.3, Mr. Shashank Singh, Advocate holding brief on behalf of Mr. Abhinav Singh, learned counsel for opposite party no.4 and Mr. Dileep Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for opposite party no.5.

¶7

Petition has been filed seeking a direction to authority concerned to permit petitioner to work as Shiksha Mitra.

¶8

It has been submitted that earlier petitioner had been engaged as a Shiksha Mitra on 11.10.2006 whereafter she continuously worked as such and appeared in the U.P.T.E.T. Examination in year 2018 whereafter she was selected in aforesaid examination and joined in pursuance thereof on the post of Assistant Teacher but subsequently her services were terminated vide order dated 16.04.2021 which is under challenge in WRIT - A No. - 3056 of 2023.

¶9

It is submitted that since petitioner is out of employment, she can be continued as Shiksha Mitra in pursuance of her earlier employment.

¶10

Learned counsel for opposite party no.4 on the basis of instructions however submits that petitioner although had

¶11

earlier been appointed as Shiksha Mitra but subsequently submitted her resignation from the said post on 19.10.2020 which was accepted on the same day. It is therefore submitted that once petitioner had already resigned her post and the scheme of appointment of Shiksha Mitra has already ended in year 2010, no such relief can be granted to petitioner.

¶12

Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perusal of material on record, it is evident and admitted that petitioner although had been appointed as Shiksha Mitra in year 2006 but subsequently submitted her resignation which was also accepted by authority concerned. It is also submitted that as of now the Scheme of Shiksha Mitra has been discontinued ever since year 2010.

¶13

In such circumstance, this Court does not find any occasion to indulge in the petition since no such continuance or appointment in the scheme can be directed.

¶14

Consequently, the petition being devoid of merit is dismissed at the admission stage itself. Parties to bear their own costs.

¶15

Order Date :- 1.8.2024 kvg/-

¶16

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

Smt. Saroj Nishad v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Basic Education Deptt. Lko. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Smt. Saroj Nishad v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Basic Education Deptt. 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Udai Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Agriculture Marketing and Foreign Trade Lko and Others

Ajit Kumar Singh and Another Vs Union of India Thru. Its Secy. Min. of Communication New Delhi and 2 Others

Prayag Datt Mishra and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Cooperative Deptt. Lko and 2 Others

Newanu Sharma vs State of U.P Thru. Addl. Chief Secy., Home, Lko. and 3 Others

Rajendra Kumar Chaubey vs U.P. Cooperative Federation Ltd. Thru. Its Managing Director Lko. and Another

Durgesh Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Cooperative Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others