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 1, Cited by 1]

Allahabad High Court

Shatanand Pandey vs State Of U.P. Thru' Secry., Deptt. Of ... on 2 April, 2010

Author: Amreshwar Pratap Sahi

Bench: Amreshwar Pratap Sahi

Court No. - 26

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 57818 of 2006

Petitioner :- Shatanand Pandey
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru' Secry., Deptt. Of Secondary And Others
Petitioner Counsel :- Rajeev Misra,Rajesh Mishra
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,Awadhesh Tiwari


Hon'ble Amreshwar Pratap Sahi,J.

Heard Shri Rajeev Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel at length.

There are two grounds for refusing to accept the claim of the petitioner in the impugned order. Firstly that the post creation order dated 13.12.1982 (annexure 1 to the writ petition) could not be verified from the authorities or from the Management of the institution and secondly, even if the post was created the same stood lapsed under Chapter 2 Regulation 20 of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1920.

Shri Rajeev Mishra contends that both these findings cannot coexist, inasmuch as, if there is no post sanctioned, there is no occasion to apply Chapter 2 Regulation 20 of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 and even otherwise, if the post exists, the sanction order is of December, 1982 after the enforcement of U.P. Act No. 5 of 1982 and as such the provision of Chapter 2 Regulation 20, will not apply.

From the records which has now been filed along with the affidavits, it is evident that the District Inspector of Schools has been continuously certifying the post creation order dated 13.12.1982 and an altogether new case has been taken up in the impugned order doubting the post creation order itself.

For the said purpose, the learned standing counsel shall summon the despatch register from the office of the Deputy Director of Education Vth Region, Varanasi in respect of annexure 1 to the writ petition and also file an affidavit as to whether such a letter was dispatched or not and also with regard to the status of other records in relation to the said post creation order.

It has to be kept in mind that under the same post creation order, the requisition has also been sent to the Board for selection on other posts.

A rejoinder affidavit filed today is taken on record.

List on 19th April, 2010 on the request of learned standing counsel.

Order Date :- 2.4.2010 Akv