Manoj Kumar Pachauri vs State Of U.P.& 5 Ors.
2014 Latest Caselaw 6093 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 1
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 39873 of 2013
 

 
Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar Pachauri
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P.& 5 Ors.
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- R.S.Misra,Arun Kumar
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,B.K.Yadav,V.B.Mishra
 

 
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel,J.

The petitioner is a Shiksha Mitra. He is aggrieved by the order dated 14.05.2013 passed by the Principal, District Institute for Education and Training, Firozabad (Respondent no. 3) whereby the petitioner has not been not allowed to appear in the BTC Training course through Distant Education.

I have heard Sri R.S. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State-Respondents.

By perusal of the impugned order, it is evident that no reason has been mentioned by respondent no. 3 in his order dated 14.5.2013 for not permitting the petitioner to appear in the BTC Training Course.  It is only stated in the order that the reply of the petitioner has not been found satisfactory.

The counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention of the court to the reply dated 3.4.2013 submitted by the petitioner wherein it was stated that the petitioner has appeared in response to show cause notice dated 3.4.2014 but no one was in the office.

It is contended by the counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has passed Purva Madhyama and Uttar Madhyama Examinations conducted by the Sampurnanand Sanskrit Vishwavidyalaya, Varanasi in the year 1989 and1992. He was student of Shri Ekarsanand Sanskrit Mahavidlaya, Mainpuri. 

Counter affidavit has been filed by Sampurnanand Sanskrit Vishwavidyalaya, Varanasi. It is stated in the counter affidavit that Shri Ekarsanand Sanskrit Mahavidlaya, Mainpuri is an affiliated Institution with Sampurnanand Sanskrit Vishwavidyalaya, Varanasi and is running under the model scheme of the Government of India. It is also stated that the teachers working in this Institution are getting their salary under the Scheme of Government of India.

Be that as it may. The impugned order dated 14.05.2013 has been passed without any opportunity and without any reason. Thus this order needs to be set aside and it is accordingly set aside. The matter is remitted to Respondent no. 3 to consider the case of the petitioner afresh and pass appropriate orders after giving opportunity to the petitioner.

With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition is allowed.

Order Date :- 6.9.2014

SKS