Kuldeep vs Sri Pawan Kumar Tiwari, Dist. Inspector of Schools Ayodhya

Present contempt application has been preferred for alleged non-compliance of the judgment and order dated 31.08.2024. The relevant paras of the judgment and order dated 31.08.2024 is being reproduced hereinbelow:-

¶13

"8. Therefore in view of admission by opposite parties that the college question imparts education up till the Shastri level, clearly the Rules of 2009 were not applicable upon the petitioner at all and therefore the impugned order dated 10.05.2024 being based on the Rules of 2009 were not required to be considered while passing the impugned order, while considering petitioner's case for financial approval.

¶14

9. In view thereof, the impugned order dated 10.05.2024 is hereby quashed by issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari granting liberty to the opposite parties to pass orders afresh regarding consideration of petitioner's financial approval pertaining to petitioner. Such a decision shall be taken within a period of six weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before the said authority."

¶15

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the respondent in pursuance of the judgment and order passed in the Writ Petition has passed an order dated 15.01.2025 rejecting the claim of the applicant on the same grounds which were taken earlier while passing the order dated 10.05.2024. The order dated 10.05.2024 was quashed by the Writ court directing the respondents to take a decision afresh. So by passing an order on the same finding and reasoning is nothing but wilful disobedience of the judgment and order of the Writ Court.

¶16

After hearing learned counsel for the applicant and going through the record of the case, it is found that earlier order dated 10.5.2024 was quashed on the ground that the U.P. Board of Secondary Sanskrit Education (Appointment and Conditions of Service

¶17

CAPL No. 193 of 2026

¶18

2

¶19

of heads of Institution, Teachers and other Employees of the Institution) Rules, 2009 (hereinafter referred to as, the Rules, 2009) are not applicable whereas there is no finding with regard to the applicability of the Government Order dated 06.01.2011. The order dated 10.05.2024 has not been set aside on the ground of non-applicability of the Government Order dated 06.1.2011.

¶20

Subsequent order dated 15.01.2025 has been passed mentioning therein that the appointment was made without their being any power to appoint and there is a ban also on direct recruitment as per the Government Order dated 06.01.2011 and any appointment, which is to be made, it is to be through outsourcing.

¶21

On being asked from learned counsel for the applicant the date or year of appointment of applicant and whether at that time the Government Order dated 06.01.2011 was in existence or not, he has fairly replied that the applicant was initially appointed in the year 2016 and the Government Order dated 06.01.2011 was there but he is disputing the applicability of the same in the case of the applicant which could not be adjudicated in the present contempt proceedings.

¶22

In view of the facts, circumstances and discussion made hereinabove, the present contempt application is dismissed .

¶23

January 20, 2026 Ashish

¶24

(Manish Kumar,J.)

¶25

Digitally signed by :- ASHISH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Kuldeep v. Sri Pawan Kumar Tiwari, Dist. Inspector of Schools Ayodhya

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kuldeep v. Sri Pawan Kumar Tiwari, Dist. Inspector of Schools Ayodhya

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajeev Yadav vs Sri Shiv Sahay Awasthi, Distt. Magistrate Pratapgarh U.P. and 4 Others

Rai Ravindra Kishor Srivastava vs Rajeev Kumar, the Chief Engineer (E-3) U.P. Jal Nigam (Urban) Lko. and Another

Smt. Poornima Asthana vs Devendra Kumar, Administration and Deve. Animal Husbandry Dir. Badshah Bagh Lko

Jai Singh and Another vs Sri Pratap Singh Baghel, Dir. Basic Education, Lko. and Another

Ashwini Misra vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Laxmi Narayan Shukla vs Lal Bahadur Singh, S.D.M., Pratapgarh and Another