Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SMT. BIMALA PAL versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Smt. Bimala Pal v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. 11817 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 4902 (1 March 2006)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

HON. SHISHIR KUMAR, J.

By the Village Education Committee, Genduri applications were invited from the eligible candidates for selection on the post of Shiksha Mitra in the Primary School. The petitioner as well as other suitable candidates made applications and the petitioner was selected on the said post. The petitioner was sent for training and the petitioner obtained training from 27.4.2005 to 26.5.2005. After training the petitioner joined the said post on 7.7.2005. The petitioner was working on the said post and salary was being paid to the petitioner but suddenly without any notice to the petitioner, by order dated 15.2.2006 passed by respondent no.3, the services of the petitioner has been terminated.

The petitioner submits that prior to the aforesaid order, the petitioner has never been communicated anything even no show cause notice has been given to the petitioner. As such the order passed by the respondent dated 14.2.2006 is wholly illegal and without jurisdiction as the same is against the natural justice.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and in view of the submissions made by the petitioner, it will be appropriate that if the petitioner submits a detailed representation annexing copy of the writ petition before respondent no.3 within one week, the respondent no.3 is directed to consider the grievance of the petitioner and he will also take into consideration the fact that under what circumstances, the order dated 14.2.2006 has been passed. The respondent no.3 shall pass an appropriate detailed and reasoned order according to law preferably within one month from the date of production of a certified copy of this order before him.

With these observations the writ petition is disposed of.

1.3.2006

V.Sri/-

W.P. 11817 of 2006


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.