Dismissed

Dev Kumari Singh v. State of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand HC11 Nov 2021WPMS/562/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition regarding appointment of an Authorized Controller at an educational institution was dismissed as infructuous because the petitioner had already been handed over charge and subsequently her term as Manager ended, leaving no useful purpose in pending the matter.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed as infructuous; petitioner at liberty to raise contentions regarding Authorized Controller in appropriate proceeding.

Dev Kumari Singh Vs State of Uttarakhand — Service and Employment | Uttarakhand HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND

¶2

AT NAINITAL

¶3

ON THE 11^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2021

¶4

BEFORE:

¶5

HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI

¶6

Writ Petition (M/S) No. 562 of 2021

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

Smt. Dev Kumari Singh. .....Petitioner (By Mr. Subhash Upadhyay, Advocate)

¶9

AND:

¶10

State of Uttarakhand & others. ....Respondents

¶11

(By Mr. T.S. Phartiyal, Addl. Chief Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand)

¶12

JUDGMENT

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶14

According to the petitioner, she was elected as Manager of Kishan Inter College, Lalpur, District Udham Singh Nagar. She has challenged the order dated 31.12.2020 passed by Additional Director, Secondary Education, Kumaon, whereby an Authorized Controller was appointed to manage the affairs of Kishan Inter College, Lalpur. Perusal of the impugned order reveals that Authorized Controller was appointed for six months or till constitution of new Committee of Management, whichever is earlier.

¶15

This Court had passed an interim order on 17.03.2021, whereby effect and operation of the impugned order dated 31.12.2020 was stayed.

¶16

Learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the State has drawn attention of this Court

¶17

¶18

to Annexure No.-1 to the counter affidavit filed by Mr. R.C. Arya, Chief Education Officer, Udham Singh Nagar. Perusal of Annexure No.-1 to the counter affidavit reveals that charge of Manager was handed over to the petitioner on 31.03.2021. Statement to this effect has also been made in paragraph no. 4 of the counter affidavit.

¶19

Learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the State further states that term of the petitioner as Manager has come to an end.

¶20

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that election for constituting new Committee of Management has already been held.

¶21

Be that as it may, since petitioner was handed over charge of Manager and subsequently, term of petitioner as Manager has come to an end, therefore, no useful purpose would be served by keeping this writ petition pending.

¶22

Accordingly, Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. However, petitioner shall be at liberty to raise all contentions regarding acts of omission and commission by the Authorized Controller, in an appropriate proceeding.

¶23

(MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI, J.)

¶24

Navin

Dev Kumari Singh v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dev Kumari Singh v. State of Uttarakhand

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

Tulsi Kumar Goyal Vs Union of Inida

Radhey Shyam Goyal Vs Union of India

Heera Singh Rana Vs Gaurav Chatwal

Ajay Kumar Tiwari Vs Yogendra Sharma

Jai Durga Stone Mills Vs State of Uttarakhand through Secretary Transport Secretariat Complex

Alaknanda Hydro Power Company Ltd. Vs Union of India