Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Allahabad High Court

Shail Sharma vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others on 16 November, 2019

Author: Suneet Kumar

Bench: Suneet Kumar





HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 2
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17857 of 2019
 

 
Petitioner :- Shail Sharma
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Sunil Kumar Srivastava,Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Prem Prakash Yadav
 

 
Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.
 

Heard Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Sri Sunil Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondent and learned counsel for the third to fifth respondents.

Petitioner came to be appointed as assistant teacher under the Dying-in-Harness Rules after the death of his father in 2004. Presently, he is working as head master. Petitioner was served a notice dated 25 September 2019, by the fourth respondent, Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Bijnor, calling upon him to show cause as to why the services of the petitioner may not be terminated, as the spouse of the deceased employee (mother of the petitioner) was gainfully employed in the services of the State Government. Petitioner submitted his reply to the show cause notice, but no decision, thereon, has been taken by the fourth respondent.

In this back drop, it is urged that by the impugned order dated 12 September 2019, passed by the fifth respondent, Khand Shiksha Adhikari, Kiratpur, Bijnor, petitioner has been restrained from performing his duties on the direction received from the fourth respondent, Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Bijnor.

It is submitted that petitioner has put in more than 15 years of service; objection has been taken belatedly and that too without passing an order on the show cause notice. On mere notice the salary of the petitioner cannot be stopped.

Learned Standing Counsel and learned counsel for the fourth respondent submits that the notice shall be decided expeditiously.

In view thereof, on consent, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 12 September 2019, passed by the fifth respondent, Khand Shiksha Adhikari, Kiratpur, Bijnor, is set aside and quashed. The fourth respondent, Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Bijnor, is directed to decide the notice by a reasoned and speaking order after considering the reply of the petitioner, in accordance with the rules. Petitioner shall be entitled to salary on month to month basis which shall abide by the decision taken on the notice by the fourth respondent.

Order Date :- 16.11.2019 K.K. Maurya