Dismissed

Rakesh Kumar Mishra v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Secondary Education, Lucknow and Others

Allahabad HC16 Oct 2024WRIA/9198/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged dismissal orders. Court held dismissal ineffective without competent authority approval. Dismissed writ petition directing respondents to decide within two weeks via hearing parties.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent no. 3 to take final decision within two weeks by hearing parties if no legal impediment exists.

Rakesh Kumar Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl… — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:69510

¶2

Court No. - 5 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 9198 of 2024 Petitioner :- Rakesh Kumar Mishra Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Secondary Education, Lucknow And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pt. S. Chandra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Aakash Rai,Anand Kumar Sharma,Raj Kr Singh Suryvanshi,Vaibhav Sharma

¶3

Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J.

¶4

Heard Sri Pt. S. Chandra, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Vivek Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents no. 1 to 3 and Sri Vaibhav Sharma, learned counsel for the respondents no. 4 & 6 and Sri Raj Kumar Singh Suryvanshi, learned counsel for the respondent no. 5.

¶5

Counter affidavit filed today in Court by Sri Vaibhav Sharma, learned counsel for the respondents no. 4 & 6 is taken on record to which rejoinder affidavit has also been by the learned counsel for the petitioner is also taken on record.

¶6

Under challenge is the dismissal orders dated 16.09.2024/18.09.2024 passed by the respondent no. 4, a copy of which is annexure 1 to the writ petition.

¶7

A preliminary objection has been taken by learned Additional Chief Standing counsel that considering the provisions of Section 16 (G) (3) (a) of the Uttar Pradesh Intermediate Act, 1921, the dismissal order would only come into effect once it is approved by the District Inspector of Schools.

¶8

Sri Vaibhav Sharma, learned counsel for the respondents no. 4 & 6 also states that the competent authority i.e District Inspector of Schools, the respondent no.3 has called the petitioner along with the members of the Committee of Management in his office on 18.10.2024 for the said purpose.

¶9

Considering the aforesaid more particularly the provisions of the Act, 1921 and that the dismissal order would only come into force after the approval of the competent authority i.e District Inspector of Schools, the present writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the competent authority i.e the respondent no. 3 to take a final decision in the matter in accordance with law after hearing all the parties concerned within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order provided there is no legal impediment.

¶10

Sri Vaibhav Sharma, learned counsel for the respondents no. 4 & 6 also points out that as in terms of the Act, 1921, the dismissal order would only come into force after it being approved by the District Inspector of Schools consequently, till such time whatever emoluments are payable to the petitioner would continue to be paid by the Committee of Management.

¶11

Order Date :- 16.10.2024 Pachhere/-

¶12

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

Rakesh Kumar Mishra v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Secondary Education, Lucknow and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh Kumar Mishra v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Secondary Education, Lucknow and 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

Prabodh Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./Prin. Secy. Deptt. of It and Electronics Lko and 2 Others

C/M Thru. Manager, Vivekanand Shiksha Niketan, Inter College at Nevarna and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Education ( Secondary) Lko. and 3 Others

Jeet Bahadur Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Secondary Education Lko and 4 Others

Ashok Kumar Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Secondary Edu. Lko. and 3 Others

Anil Kumar Upadhyay Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Secondary Education U.P. Lko. and 5 Others

Devaki Devi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Medical Education Lko and 2 Others