Aradhana Pandey vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 6201 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 32
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3595 of 2023
 

 
Petitioner :- Aradhana Pandey
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shatrughan Jee Pandey,Satya Prakash Mishra
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ras Bihari Pradhan
 

 
Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.

Heard Sri Shatrughan Jee Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel and Sri Mahendra Kumar Mishra holding brief of Sri R.B. Pradhan, for the respondent no.3.

The case of the petitioner is that she is posted as an Assistant Teacher at Primary School, Anapur, Saraiya, Education area Karnda, District Ghazipur since 12.10.2019.

According to the petitioner, she submitted an application on 09.02.2023 before the third respondent/ District Basic Education Officer, Ghazipur, in the format seeking maternity leave with the approval of the Headmaster of the Institution. The writ petitioner conceived and delivered a baby, however, her maternity leave was cancelled by virtue of order dated 15.02.2023 passed by the third respondent on the pretext that within a period of 2 years, it was second maternity leave. Learned counsel for the writ petitioner relies upon the judgment in the case of Smt. Guddi vs. State of U.P. and others in Writ-A No. 4996 of 2022 decided on 08.04.2022 as well as clusters of writ petitions leading Writ-A No. 9535 of 2022, Smt. Anupam Yadav vs. State of U.P. and others along with other writ petitions decided on 21.10.2022, so as to contend that her maternity leave could not have been cancelled on the said pretext.

Learned Standing Counsel as well as Sri Mahendra Kumar Mishra, holding brief of Sri R.B. Pradhan, on the other hand have argued that though the matter stands covered in view of the judgment in the case of Anupam Yadav (supra) as well as the judgment in the case of Guddi (supra), order be set aside, matter be remitted to the third respondent to pass a fresh and reasoned order in view of the mandate of this Court as referred to above. It has also been submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents that no fruitful purpose would be served by detaining the petition on board, however, since the matter has to be given a fresh look by the third respondent, thus the matter be remitted back.

Considering the submissions of rival parties and the stand taken by them, particularly, the fact that matter stands covered on legal issue in view of judgment in Guddi Devi (supra), the writ petition is allowed. The order dated 15.02.2023 is quashed. Matter is remitted and restored back to the third respondent / District Basic Education Officer, Ghazipur to pass a fresh reasoned and speaking order from within a period of one month from the date of production of certified copy of this order, subject to any legal impediment and in accordance with law.

Subject to above, the petition stands allowed.

Order Date :- 27.2.2023

N.S.Rathour