Disposed

Alok Kumar Pandey v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Secondary Edu. Lko. and 7 Others

Allahabad HC12 Dec 2024WRIA/6357/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single-judge bench issued direction to the Joint Director of Education to decide the petitioner's representation within specified timelines. The court disposed of the writ petition without adjudicating on the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Respondent No. 3 to decide representation within six weeks; to deposit certified copy of impugned order.

Alok Kumar Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Secondary Edu. Lko. and 7 Others — Allahabad HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:83335

¶2

Court No. - 5

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6357 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Alok Kumar Pandey Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Secondary Edu. Lko. And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pt. S. Chandra,Abhishek Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Raj Kr Singh Suryvanshi

¶5

Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Vivek Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents no.1 to 4, and Sri Raj Kumar Singh Suryavanshi, learned counsel for respondent no.5.

¶7

Despite notice having been issued to respondent no.6 and it having been served as per office report dated 28.10.2023 nobody has put in appearance on its behalf. Accordingly, the Court proceeds to hear and decide the matter.

¶8

At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner states that he does not intend to challenge the order impugned dated 07.07.2023, a copy of which is Annexure-1 to the petition, at this stage but states that the grievance of the petitioner be considered in accordance with law by the competent authority who is said to be the Joint Director of Education, Devi Patan Region, Ayodhya i.e. respondent no.3.

¶9

To the aforesaid prayer, learned counsels for the respondents have no objection.

¶10

In view of the above, it is provided that in case the petitioner submits a representation within two weeks from today before respondent no.3 then respondent no.3 shall endevour to decide the same by means of a reasoned and speaking order within a further period of six weeks from the date of submission of the representation along with certified copy of this order.

¶11

With the aforesaid direction, writ petition is disposed off.

¶12

It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits of the case.

¶13

Order Date :- 12.12.2024 A. Katiyar

¶14

Digitally signed by :- AMIT KATIYAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Alok Kumar Pandey v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Secondary Edu. Lko. and 7 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Alok Kumar Pandey v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Secondary Edu. Lko. and 7 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abhishek Srivastava Vs State of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy. Basic Education and Ors.

Varun Kumar Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Cooperative Lko. and 7 Others

Prabhat Yadav and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Basic Education Lko. and 4 Others

Vimlesh Kumar Mishra and 4 Ors. Vs State of U.P. through Prin. Secy. Energy Lko. and Ors.

Jagdish Prasad Vs Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry of Communication New Delhi and 2 Others

Ram Ratan Vs U.P. Jal Nigam (Urban) Thru. Managing Director Lko and 2 Others