Smt. Prabhawati Devi vs Rajya Pariyojna Nideshak
2025 Latest Caselaw 3385 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Smt. Prabhawati Devi vs Rajya Pariyojna Nideshak on 30 June, 2025

Author: Ravindra Maithani

Bench: Ravindra Maithani

     HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
            Writ Petition No. 723 of 2023 (S/S)
Smt. Prabhawati Devi                                 ..........Petitioner

                                    Vs.

Rajya Pariyojna Nideshak, Samagra Siksha, Uttarakhand
and others                          ........ Respondents
Present :   Mr. M.K. Ray, Advocate for the petitioner.
            Mr. Rajeev Singh Bisht, Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the
            respondent nos.1 to 5.


                               JUDGMENT

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

The challenge in this petition is made to

Communication dated 17.04.2023 of the respondent

no.4/Chief Education Officer, District Udham Singh

Nagar, by which, on retirement of the petitioner the

charge of the Warden, it was directed that the charge of

Warden be handed over to some other person; the

challenge is also made to the consequential

communication dated 18.04.2023, passed by the

respondent no.5/the Deputy Education Officer,

Gadarpur, District Udham Singh Nagar.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and

perused the record.

3. The petitioner was working as a Warden in

Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose, Hostel Gadarpur, District

Udham Singh Nagar. She was retired. She was given two

years' extension. After expiry of the period of extension,

by the impugned communication dated 17.04.2023, the

respondent no.4 directed that the charge of Warden may

be handed over to Smt. Renu, a Teacher in the

Government Higher Secondary School, Brakheda,

Gadarpur, District Udham Singh Nagar. Thereafter,

consequential communication was made on 18.04.2023,

by the respondent no.5/the Deputy Education Officer,

Gadarpur, District Udham Singh Nagar.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would

submit that the petitioner would still be considered for

her extension in view of Government Order dated

19.02.2018. He would submit that the petitioner may be

granted extension in view of the Government Order dated

19.02.2018.

5. In fact, Government Order dated 19.02.2018,

which has been filed as Annexure No.1 to the

supplementary affidavit by the petitioner is with regard to

selection process of the Wardens in the Hostels. It does

not speak of any extension. It is the admitted case of the

petitioner that she has already been granted two years

extension on her retirement. No Government Order, Rules

or Regulation has been placed for perusal of the Court,

which may indicate that even after two years extension,

further extension may be considered. Therefore, there is

no merit in the case. Accordingly, the petition deserves to

be dismissed at the stage of admission itself.

6. The petition is dismissed in limine.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 30.06.2025 Sanjay

SANJAY Digitally signed by SANJAY KANOJIA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=e50e50b49596520698eff87e0a08bbd504686df4d1afc60f54a2

KANOJIA 87831dec46fe, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=26EEB7122ED0DD23233A255DD8EC450A84B515A087C AEFD1B3179A7DEAE40699, cn=SANJAY KANOJIA Date: 2025.07.01 18:17:36 +05'30'