Surendra Prasad Singh vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others
2016 Latest Caselaw 4303 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 7
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 31608 of 2016
 

 
Petitioner :- Surendra Prasad Singh
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Awadhesh Kumar Malviya
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pramod Kumar Pandey
 

 
Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; learned Standing Counsel for the respondent nos.1 and 2; and Sri Pramod Kumar Pandey for the respondent no.4.

The present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 23.04.2016 passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Ghazipur whereby the signature of the respondent no.4 has been attested for carrying out function as an officiating principal of the institution consequent to the retirement of the previous officiating principal, namely, Ramanuj Singh on 31.03.2016.

There is no dispute that the respondent no.4 is the seniormost lecturer in the institution concerned and is senior to the petitioner.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has invited attention of the Court to a letter dated 30.06.2014 issued by the Authorized Controller of the Institution addressed to the then Principal of the Institution thereby requesting him to hand over charge to Ramanuj Singh because Shivji Singh (respondent no.4) was not fit to hold the office. It has been submitted that once the respondent no.4 was not found fit for the office by the Authorized Controller and the action of the Controller has not been challenged by the respondent no.4, therefore, the respondent no.4 cannot now be considered as  officiating principal.

The aforesaid contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner cannot be accepted because the letter dated 30.06.2014 which has been relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner is not addressed to the respondent no.4 and it does not adjudicate any right of the respondent no.4. Even otherwise, it has not been demonstrated as to how the respondent no.4 is unfit for the post.

Under the circumstances, since the respondent no.4 is, admittedly, the seniormost lecturer in the Institution, no error can be found with the impugned order. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

Order Date :- 15.7.2016

AKShukla/-