Allahabad High Court
Smt. Shashi Bala Jain vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others on 5 February, 2020
Author: Surya Prakash Kesarwani
Bench: Surya Prakash Kesarwani
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 5 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 7792 of 2019 Petitioner :- Smt. Shashi Bala Jain Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ram Krishna Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J.
1- Heard Sri Ram Krishna Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Shailendra Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.
2- This writ petition has been filed praying for the following relief:
"1. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari calling for the record and quashing the impugned order dated 11.3.2019 passed by Director of Education (Secondary), Uttar Pradesh, the respondent No.2.
2. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to permit the petitioner to deposit the entire provident fund from the date of her appointment and to fix and grant the petition to the petitioner counting the services rendered by the petitioner from her date of appointment i.e., 8.7.1987 with the arrears and the interest thereon within the period stipulated by this Hon'ble Court.
3. To issue a writ, order or direction of the suitable nature which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
4. Award the cost of the petition to the petitioner."
3- Briefly stated facts of the present case are that undisputedly, the petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Teacher in Primary Section attached to "Digamber Jain Inter College, Dhuliaganj, Agra" on 8.1.1987. The aforesaid primary section came on grant-in-aid list in the year 1989. The initial appointment of the petitioner was an untrained teacher. The exemption from training was granted to her by the Joint Director of Eduction, Agra, by order dated 9.11.2004 w.e.f. 1.1.2004, which attained finality. The services of the petitioner are governed by the provisions of U.P. Basic Education Act, 1972 and the Rules framed thereunder.
4- The claim of the petitioner for inclusion of period of service as untrained teacher for the purposes of computing qualifying length of service was rejected by the impugned order dated 11.3.2019.
5- Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is entitled for payment of pension in view of the law laid down by this Court in Mangali Prasad Verma Vs. State of U.P. and others, (2013)1 UPLBEC 285 as affirmed by the Division Bench in Special Appeal Defective No.678 of 2013 (State of U.P. Thru' Secretary Secondary Education and 5 Ors. v. Mangali Prasad Verma and 2 Ors.), decided on 13.9.2017, the judgment in Smt. Ram Chameli Devi v. State of U.P. and others, (2018)2 ADJ 262, Special Appeal Defective No.228 of 2016 (State of U.P. and 6 others v. Shri Krishna Prasad Yadav and 13 others), decided on 14.5.2017, Buddhi Ram v. State of U.P. and others, (2013) 1 ADJ 254, Hans Raj Pandey v. The state of U.P. and others, (2007)3 UPLBEC 2073, as affirmed by the Division Bench judgment dated 25.4.2008 in Special Appeal Defective No.344 of 2008 (Basic Shiksha Parishad and others v. Hans Raj Pandey and another), Shashi Srivastava v. State of U.P. and another (2019) 7 ADJ 302(Paragraph 17).
6- Learned Standing Counsel supports the impugned order and submits that the Government Order dated 5.9.1970 has no application on the facts of the present case, inasmuch as, subsequently, the U.P. Basic Education Act, 1972 was enacted and the petitioner was appointed after the enactment of the Act, 1972, as an untrained assistant teacher in primary section of the institution in question which came on grant-in-aid list in the year 1989. He submits that since the petitioner has not rendered ten years of qualifying regular as she came to be regularly appointed w.e.f. 1.1.2004 and retired on 30.6.2012. Therefore, the claim of the petitioner for pension has been rightly rejected.
7- In support of his submission learned standing counsel has relied upon a judgment in Writ-A No.3930 of 2019 (Sri Krishna Kumar v. State of U.P. and 3 others) and the interim order dated 24.2.2014 in Special Appeal Defective No.189 of 2014 (State of U.P. and 4 others v. Prem Singh Verma and another) passed by the Division Bench staying the effect and operation of the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 30.7.2013 in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.8876 of 2013 (Prem Singh Verma v. State of U.P. and others ), (2013) 7 ADJ 463.
Judgement reserved.
Order Date :- 5.2.2020 Ak/