Allahabad High Court
Samar Pal Singh And Another vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others on 8 April, 2022
Bench: Rajiv Joshi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 36
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5139 of 2022
Petitioner :- Samar Pal Singh And Another
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Sudhir Dixit,Smt. Richa Dixita
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Prem Prakash Yadav
Hon'ble Rajiv Joshi,J.
Heard Sri Sudhir Dixit, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing counsel for the respondents-3 & 4 and Sri Prem Prakash Yadav, learned counsel for respondents-2 & 5.
The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed for the following relief:-
"a. Issue, a writ, order or direction, in the nature of mandamus, commanding the respondents, to consider the candidature of the petitioners for appointment as Assistant Teachers in Primary School, run and managed by the Board of Basic Education, Uttar Pradesh, by treating them as Regular BTC candidates and give them age relxation in the process of selection."
It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners were initially appointed as untrained Assistant Teacher and currently working in various unaided, recognized privately managed Institutions and all the petitioners had requisite qualification being appointed as Assistant Teacher. It is further contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that as per Rule 6 of U.P. Basic Education (Teachers) Services Rules, 1981, the criteria has been laid down, which the petitioners do not fulfil and as such they want age relaxation as per Rule 6 of the Rules 1981 on the post of Assistant Teacher from 21 to 40 years and apart from the other qualifications, a Basic Teachers Certificate of two years is also mandatory. It is next submitted that in view of the Government Orders dated 6.9.1994 as well as 13.6.1995, the petitioners are entitled for the relief as claimed. It is also contended that identical controversy has already been settled in Service Single No. 1152 of 2012 decided on 30.7.2014 which was affirmed by Hon'ble Apex Court in Special Leave to Appeal No. 2056 of 2022 vide judgment dated 23.2.2022. Lastly, it is contended that the petitioners have jointly represented the matter before respondent no.2 Secretary, Basic Shiksha Parishad, Directorate of Education, Prayagraj on 28.12.2021, which remain pending till date.
Learned Standing counsel submits that no useful purpose would be served to keep the writ petition pending and suitable direction may be issued by this Court to the authority concerned for deciding the same in time bound manner.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, direction is issued upon respondent no.2 Secretary, Basic Shiksha Parishad, Directorate of Education, Prayagraj to decide the representation of the petitioners dated 28.12.2021 by reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within a period of two months months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.
With the above direction, the writ petition stands finally disposed of. No order as to costs.
Order Date :- 8.4.2022
Noman
