Allahabad High Court
Smt.Shiv Laxmi Inre W.P.No.147 S/S Of ... vs State Of U.P.Thr.Secy Basic Education ... on 4 September, 2019
Bench: Ajai Lamba, Manish Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 2 Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 503 of 2007 Appellant :- Smt.Shiv Laxmi Inre W.P.No.147 S/S Of 2007 Respondent :- State Of U.P.Thr.Secy Basic Education And 4 Ors Counsel for Appellant :- Maehndra Singh Rathore,Brijesh Kumar Yadav,Durga Prasad Verma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Jyotinjay Verma,Ram Praksh Verma Hon'ble Ajai Lamba,J.
Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
(Application No.17941 of 2007)
1. Smt. Shiv Laxmi has filed the appeal which is beyond limitation.
2. None has appeared on behalf of the appellant. Case relates to the year 2007. Twelve years have gone by. We do not find any justifiable reason to adjourn the case to await appearance of the counsel.
3. For the reasons given in the affidavit accompanying the application for condonation of delay and in view of the fact that learned counsel for respondents has not opposed the condonation of delay, we hereby allow the application.
4. Learned counsel for respondents prays for taking up the main case/appeal for adjudication today itself.
4.9.2019 kkb/ Court No. - 2 Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 503 of 2007 Appellant :- Smt.Shiv Laxmi Inre W.P.No.147 S/S Of 2007 Respondent :- State Of U.P.Thr.Secy Basic Education And 4 Ors Counsel for Appellant :- Maehndra Singh Rathore,Brijesh Kumar Yadav,Durga Prasad Verma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Jyotinjay Verma,Ram Praksh Verma Hon'ble Ajai Lamba,J.
Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
(ORAL)
1. Smt. Shiv Laxmi has preferred this intra-Court special appeal in challenge to order dated 8.1.2007 rendered in Writ Petition No.147(S/S) of 2007 Smt. Shiv Lakshmi versus State of U.P. and others.
Vide the impugned order, the writ petition filed by the appellant/writ petitioner was dismissed.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant/writ petitioner has not appeared. Case relates to the year 2007. Twelve years have gone by. We find no justifiable reason to adjourn the case to await appearance of the counsel.
In the circumstances, with the assistance of learned counsel for respondents Mr. Jyotinjay Verma, Advocate, we have gone through the pleadings and contents of the impugned order.
3. Perusal of the impugned order indicates that the learned Single Judge has taken into account the fact that the District Magistrate has considered the matter in deference to order passed in Writ Petition No.8258(S/S) of 2006. It has been directed that fresh selection may be held for selection of Shiksha Mitra for academic session 2006-07.
Learned Single Judge found no illegality in approach of the District Magistrate and hence dismissed the petition.
4. Learned counsel for respondents Mr. Jyotinjay Verma has pointed out that Shiksha Mitras are appointed on honorarium basis for one year only. In any case, Shiksha Mitras are not being appointed after issuance of Government Order dated 2.6.2010 vide which appointment to Shiksha Mitra was banned. Government Order dated 2.6.2010 was issued consequent to the coming in force Right of Children to Free and compulsory Education Act, 2009. The Government Order was issued so as to ensure that duly qualified and trained teachers are appointed in the interest of qualitative education.
It has been pointed out that perusal of the impugned order indicates that the issue related to academic session 2006-07 and therefore at this point in time, no purpose in law or in fact would be served by adjudicating the issue.
5. Considering the stand of learned counsel for respondents, as noted above, we are in agreement with the stand of respondents.
6. For all the reasons given above, the special appeal is disposed of.
Order Date :- 4.9.2019 kkb/