State Of U.P. Through Its ... vs Sahendra Prasad
2022 Latest Caselaw 16014 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 43
 

 
Case :- CIVIL MISC REVIEW APPLICATION No. - 364 of 2022
 

 
Applicant :- State Of U.P. Through Its Principal Secretary,Department Of Secondary Education
 
Opposite Party :- Sahendra Prasad
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Chandan Kumar
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Mata Pher
 

 
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.

Ref:- Delay Condonation Application No.04 of 2022

Heard.

Delay in filing the review application has been explained to the satisfaction of the Court. Delay is, accordingly, condoned.

Application stands allowed.

Ref:- Review Application

The present review application has been filed by the State primarily on the ground that qualification of 'Shiksha Alankar' possessed by the writ petitioner is not a recognized qualification and, therefore, stoppage of salary of the writ petitioner vide order dated 27.03.2015 is justified.

Perusal of the record would indicate that writ petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher in C.T. Grade in July, 1977 and his appointment was duly approved. No service rules were in force at the time of initial appointment of writ petitioner and the statutory rules in respect of such teachers prescribing qualification came into existence for the first time in the year 1978. It is not shown by the State that on the date of initial appointment as Assistant Teacher in July, 1977 the writ petitioner was not possessing requisite qualification. It is otherwise a matter of record that the petitioner continuously received salary from the State and also attained the age of superannuation on 31.03.2021. The writ petition was filed challenging the order of District Inspector of Schools, dated 27.03.2015, whereby salary payable to petitioner was stopped on account of some enquiry initiated against him. This Court has taken a view that enquiry may go on but withholding of salary of petitioner would be impermissible. Such continuance of petitioner, however, has been made subject to final conclusion of the appropriate enquiry etc.

Learned State Counsel points out that writ petitioner's appointment has subsequently been cancelled under section 16E(10) of U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 vide order dated 28.06.2021.

The subsequent order dated 28.06.2021 was neither subject matter of challenge in the writ petition nor was even available at the time of passing of the order dated 28.01.2021 and, therefore, such material cannot constitute any basis for review of the judgment and order dated 28.01.2021. Merits of the order dated 28.06.2021, therefore, is not required to be commented upon by this Court in this review petition.

No other ground is pressed. Therefore, no occasion arises for this Court to review the order dated 28.01.2021. Consequently, review petition fails and is dismissed.

Order Date :- 4.11.2022

Ashok Kr.