Disposed

Girjesh Kumari Verma v. State of U.P.Thru.Addl.Chief Secy./Prin.Secy.Secondary and Ors.

Allahabad HC16 Dec 2024WRIA/9800/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed the petition by permitting the petitioner to submit a representation regarding her promotion. The court directed the relevant authority to decide within six weeks. The court did not decide the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

Permitted the petitioner to submit a representation to be decided within six weeks via a reasoned order.

Girjesh Kumari Verma Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:84591

¶2

Court No. - 5 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 9800 of 2021 Petitioner :- Girjesh Kumari Verma Respondent :- State Of U.P.Thru.Addl.Chief Secy./Prin.Secy.Secondary And Ors Counsel for Petitioner :- Yogendra Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶3

Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents no. 1 to 4.

¶5

Despite the notice being issued to the respondent no. 5 and as per office report dated 29.09.2021, notice on respondent no. 5 being deemed sufficient, however, nobody has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent no. 5 neither any counter affidavit has been filed till date despite the specific order of this Court indicating no more time to file counter affidavit dated 16.12.2023.

¶6

Since the matter is too trivial to keep pending before this Court, the same is being decided at this stage with the assistance of learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the State-respondents.

¶7

Instant writ petition has been filed praying for a mandamus commanding the respondents to consider the candidature of the petitioner for her promotion to the post of L.T. Grade Teacher under the 25 percent quota as prescribed under Regulation 72 (2-Ka) of Chapter-11 of the Intermediate Education Act, 1921 (hereinafter referred to as "Act,1921").

¶8

Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is fully qualified for being promoted as Assistant Teacher, L.T. Grade Teacher yet the respondent no. 5 i.e The Committee of Management, M.D.K. Balika Inter College, Balrampur has failed to send the requisition in this regard to District Inspector of Schools, Balrampur i.e the respondent no. 4 till date and hence the instant writ petition.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioner after arguing at some length submits that with regard to the relief sought in the writ petition, the petitioner may be permitted to submit a representation before the respondent No.4 which may be directed to be decided within a fixed time frame to which learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel has 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 the respondent No.4 then the respondent No.4 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 receipt of a certified copy of this order along with representation.

¶11

With the aforesaid direction, writ petition is disposed of.

¶12

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

¶13

Order Date :- 16.12.2024/Pachhere/-

¶14

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

Girjesh Kumari Verma v. State of U.P.Thru.Addl.Chief Secy./Prin.Secy.Secondary and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Girjesh Kumari Verma v. State of U.P.Thru.Addl.Chief Secy./Prin.Secy.Secondary and Ors.

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

Similar cases

Ram Pal Singh and Ors. Vs State of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy. Co-Operative and Ors.

Bhupal Singh Vs State of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy. Cooperative and Ors.

Neel Kamal Sharma and Another Vs State of U.P. through Secy. Basic Edu. Lko. and Ors.

National Highways Authority of India Thru. Project Director vs Lallu Ram and others

Smt. Swarna Sahni and 11 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Finance Lko. and 9 Others

Radhey Shyam vs U.O.I Thru. Secy. Ministry of Communication New Delhi and 2 Others