Smt. Neha Mishra vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 5920 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?
 
Court No. - 35
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4871 of 2022
 

 
Petitioner :- Smt. Neha Mishra
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Pradeep Kumar Singh
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Shashi Kant Verma
 

 
Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri S.K. Verma, learned counsel for the respondents no. 3 and 4 and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.

With the consent of learned counsel for the parties the writ petition is being disposed of without calling any counter affidavit.

The petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher at Kanya Prathmik Vidhyalay, Budnamau District Farrukhabad. On 15.06.2021 the petitioner made an application before the respondent no. 4 for grant of maternity leave. By order dated 16.06.2021 the claim of the petitioner for grant of maternity leave was rejected by the respondent no. 4. The said order is under challenge.

The impugned order records that no leave would be admissible to the petitioner prior to the expiry of two years from the date of end of first maternity leave. The said order does not take into consideration the relevant provisions of Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 and further no reasons have been assigned for rejecting the claim of the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the judgment and order of this Court rendered in Service Single No. 32394 of 2019 (Smt. Richa Shukla Vs. State of U.P. thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Basic Education Lko. and others) decided on 11.12.2019. He submits that in view of the aforesaid judgement and order dated 16.02.2021 cannot be sustained.

Sri S.K. Verma, learned counsel for the respondents 3 and 4 does not dispute the fact that the judgment and order rendered by this Court in the matter of Smt. Richa Shukla (Supra) has not been taken into consideration. He submits that the matter may be remitted to the respondent no. 4 for fresh consideration.

After hearing the counsel for the parties, this Court is of the opinion that since the impugned order does not take into consideration the relevant provisions of Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 and since no any reasons have been assigned for rejecting the claim of the petitioner, the impugned order cannot be sustained.

Accordingly, the order dated 16.06.2021 is hereby quashed. The matter is remitted to the respondent no. 4, who shall decide the matter afresh in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of production of certified/computerized copy of this order.

With the aforesaid directions, this writ petition is allowed.

Order Date :- 5.7.2022

Ashish