Allahabad High Court
C/M Maa Vaishno Devi Public Sch. Thr Man. ... vs State Of U.P. Thru Sec. Basic Edu. Lko. ... on 4 February, 2010
Author: Dilip Gupta
Bench: Dilip Gupta
Court No. - 39 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 5837 of 2010 Petitioner :- C/M Maa Vaishno Devi Public Sch. Thr Man. Om Prakash Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Sec. Basic Edu. Lko. And Others Petitioner Counsel :- Indra Raj Singh Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,H.V. Srivastava Hon'ble Dilip Gupta,J.
The petitioner has sought the quashing of the orders dated 10th December, 2009 and 23rd December, 2009 passed by the District Basic Education Officer, Etawah and the District Social Welfare Officer, Etawah respectively against the petitioner for recovery of the amount disbursed as scholarship to the students since it was found that the Institution does not exist.
Sri Indra Raj Singh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that in fact the Institution is running at a different place and the scholarship amount had actually been distributed to the students. He submits that he had filed a detailed representation dated 28th December, 2009 to the District Social Welfare Officer, Etawah along with the relevant documents but no order has been passed and the amount is sought to be recovered from the petitioners.
Learned Standing Counsel appears for respondent nos.1, 2, 3, and 5, while Sri H.V. Srivastava appears for respondent no.4.
The fact as to whether the Institution actually exists and whether the scholarship amount was distributed has to be examined by the District Social Welfare Officer. The petitioner has filed a representation dated 28th December, 2009.
Learned Standing Counsel appearing the respondents states that the District Social Welfare Officer shall examine the representation filed by the petitioners and pass an appropriate order expeditiously.
In view of the aforesaid, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the District Social Welfare Officer, Etawah to examine the representation dated 28th December, 2009 filed by the petitioner and pass an appropriate order expeditiously, preferably within a period of two weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is produced by the petitioner before the District Social Welfare Officer, Etawah.
For a period of two weeks or till the representation is decided, whichever is earlier, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner for recovery of the amount.
It is made clear that the Court has not adjudicated upon the merits of the case which shall be examined by the District Social Welfare Officer in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 4.2.2010 SK