Murari Lal Sharma vs State Of U.P.& Others
2012 Latest Caselaw 2824 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 30
 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 29210 of 2012
 
Petitioner :- Murari Lal Sharma
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P.& Others
 
Petitioner Counsel :- B.L. Yadav
 
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,Kshitij Shailendra
 
Hon'ble V.K. Shukla,J.

Learned standing counsel has has accepted notice on  behalf of respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6. Issue notice to respondent Nos. 4 and 7 returnable within next six weeks.

Each one of the respondents is accorded six weeks' time to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit may be filed within next two weeks.

List this case after eight weeks.

Sri Kshitij Shailendra, Advocate has entered appearance on behalf of  Sri Prakash Chand Sharma, claiming himself Manager of the Committee of Management of Sasni Vidyapeeth Inter College, Sasni, Hathras.

Sri B.L. Yadav, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, disputes the status of manager being claimed by Prakash Chand Sharma, as he is not approved Manager. However, it is open to Prakash Chand Sharma to  file impleadment application, and in that event, it would be open to the petitioner to file objection to the said impleadment application, and then Court would be in a position to adjudicate the issue as to whether Prakash Chand Sharma is entitled to be impleaded as respondent or not, and accepted as Manager or not.

In the present case, it has been contended on behalf of the petitioner that Sasni Vidyapeeth Inter College, Sasni, Hathras is duly recognized institution, and its affairs are being run and managed as per the provisions as contained under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 as well as Regulations framed thereunder. Petitioner submits that under the entire Act and the Regulations neither the District Magistrate nor the Additional District Magistrate has been assigned any role to play, and in the present case, these authorities have unnecessarily proceeded  to pass the impugned orders dated 30.04.2012 and 17.05.2012 for holding enquiry against the petitioner. Petitioner submits that such an action on the part of these administrative authorities is totally beyond their competence and domain, and only in the event of law and order problem they can come forward.

Prima facie, the argument advanced appears to have some substance and requires consideration by this Court. Consequently, till the next date of listing, operation of the aforesaid impugned orders dated 30.04.2012 and 17.05.2012 (Annexures - 9 and 15 respectively, to the writ petition) shall be kept in abeyance.

Order Date :- 10.7.2012

SRY