Allahabad High Court
Manju Rani And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 9 July, 2021
Bench: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 36
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4793 of 2021
Petitioner :- Manju Rani And 2 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Santosh Kumar Rai,Amarendra Rai
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel.
Present writ petition has been preferred assailing the validity of the order dated 8.12.2020 passed by District Basic Education Officer, Bulandshahar; further assailing the order dated 28.8.2020 passed by Director of Education (Basic) U.P. Lucknow and for a direction to the respondents not to interfere in the functioning of the petitioners as Assistant Teachers in Junior Basic School of Distt. Bulandshahar.
At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioners states that the controversy in hand is squarely covered by the judgment dated 23.3.2021 passed in WRIT - A No. - 3424 of 2021 (Sudhir Kumar And 7 Others v. State Of U.P. And 4 Others) and as such it is contended that similar indulgence may also be accorded in this writ petition. For ready reference, the order dated 23.3.2021 is quoted as under:-
"1. Heard Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Alok Dwivedi, learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri Yatindra, learned counsel for respondent nos. 3 and 4 and; learned Standing Counsel for respondent nos. 1 and 2.
2. Challenge is made to the order dated 8.12.2020 passed by respondent no.4/District Basic Education Officer, Bulandshahar, by which the petitioners' services on the post of Assistant Teacher, have been terminated on a solitary ground of they having obtained their eligibility in the elementary teacher training course from universities and institutions established in Jammu & Kashmir. Earlier, on the same reason, salary payment of the petitioners had been withheld. This led to the filing of various writ petitions including Writ - A No. 10628 of 2020 (Sudhir Kumar & 16 Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & 6 Ors.) That writ petition was allowed by an order dated 8.12.2020 by following another decision of the Court in Writ - A No. 403 of 2020 (Shalu Sharma & Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & Ors. ). It is further stated at the bar that the aforesaid decision of the learned single judge has been confirmed in appeal, that order being dated 04.02.2021 passed in Special Appeal Defective No. 121 of 2021 (District Basic Education Officer Shamli Vs. Smt. Shalu Sharma & 6 Ors.).
3. In view of such facts, the reason contained in the impugned order has already been disproved by this Court and the order withholding the payment of salary to the petitioners passed on that reason quashed.
4. In view of the above, the present petition may also meet the same fate. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 8.12.2020 is set aside.
5. Present petition stands allowed. It is made clear that since the termination orders have been held to be completely unfounded, the petitioners are entitled to all consequential benefits, as if the said order never existed."
So far as factual and legal aspect is concerned, the same could not be disputed by learned Standing Counsel.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition stands allowed in terms of judgment in Sudhir Kumar And 7 Others (Supra). The orders impugned are quashed.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the petitioner alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 9.7.2021
SP/
