Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 20 (0.61 seconds)
Documents citing Ramesh Kumar Upadhyaya vs State Of U.P. And Ors. on 10 March, 2006

Markanday Mani vs State Of U.P.Thru Secy & Ors. on 9 November, 2017

15. Thus in view of the aforequoted Division Bench Judgment of this Court in the case of the present petitioner, the respondents were bound to pay salary to the petitioner as admissible to primary school teachers of High School and Intermediate. The salary was to be paid in accordance with the G.O. dated 28.2.1990 and 6.9.1990 as amended and all consequential benefits like group insurance, general provident fund and retirements benefits etc. as are being made available to primary section teachers of high school and intermediate colleges are also to be paid to the petitioners. Despite this settled legal position the State-respondents have not only arbitrarily and illegally rejected the representation of the petitioner by the impugned order but also shown disobedience to the orders and directions issued by this Court in the case of Ramesh Upadhya (supra) and Sant Prasad Mani (supra) in which the petitioner herein was petitioner no.3.
Allahabad High Court Cites 20 - Cited by 0 - S P Kesarwani - Full Document

Shri Satish Chandra And Others vs State Of U.P. And Others on 19 August, 2019

Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently urged that with the permission being granted to the institution-in-question to run primary classes (from Class I to V) and the recognition given by the District Basic Education Officer, it cannot be said that the petitioners are not entitled to salary from the State fund. The plea taken by the Deputy Director that the decision in "Ramesh Upadhyaya" (supra) is not binding on him in as much as, in a similar matter a reference has been made to the Larger Bench of the Apex Court, is contemptuous. Mere reference to the Larger Bench of an issue would not take away the binding effect of the decision of a Court passed on merits.
Allahabad High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 1 - S Agarwal - Full Document

C/M Sukhdev Prasad Tripathi Smarak ... vs State Of U.P Thru Prin Secy Secondary Edu ... on 8 May, 2019

28. It has been submitted that this Court in Ramesh Upadhyaya's case had issued a general mandamus that the two great languages of India namely Sanskrit and Urdu should be taught for at least 5 years in School, say up to Class VIII, which would provide young generation with a rudimentary knowledge of such languages and would acquaint them with their own culture. The emphasis in the order impugned on two different Institutions being run from the same campus is misplaced according to the learned counsel for the petitioner.
Allahabad High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - S Chandra - Full Document

Ranjana Devi And 10 Others vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others on 20 June, 2022

There is one committee of management which runs the Primary Section as well as the Higher Section. The petitioners were duly appointed on various posts between 1985 to 1996 but they are not getting salary when the similarly situated teachers in other institutions are getting salary. With regard to redressal of their grievance petitioners approached this court earlier by way of Writ Petition No. 3180 of 1999, which was disposed of with the direction that the facts of this case are covered by the decision of this Court in the case of Ramesh Upadhyay Vs. State of U.P. and others, 1993 (2) UPLBEC 945.
Allahabad High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 1 - Siddharth - Full Document

Ramesh Kumar vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others on 21 August, 2023

4. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that initially the petitioner has been transferred through the aforesaid order from Kaushambi to Sonbhadra. Being aggrieved he filed Writ A No. 11695 of 2023 in re: Ramesh Kumar vs State of U.P. and others and this Court vide the judgement and order dated 21.07.2023 disposed of the petition leaving it open to the petitioner to make a fresh representation before the competent authority and the competent authority was required to decide the same in accordance with law.
Allahabad High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - A Moin - Full Document

C/M Arya Gurukul Mahavidyalaya vs State Of U.P. Thru Secy. And 3 Others on 25 April, 2014

This Court also in the case of Ramesh Upadhya and another v. State of U.P. and others, (1993) 2 UPLBEC 945, has highlighted the need of preservation of Sanskrit language. The Court has directed the State Government to promote the said language. Relevant part of the judgement, being paragraphs-4, 8, 9, 12, 13 and 14, is extracted hereunder:
Allahabad High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - P K Baghel - Full Document
1   2 Next