SHITLA PRASAD CHAURASIYA versus STATE OF U.P. THRU' D.M. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

---

Shitla Prasad Chaurasiya v. State Of U.P. Thru' D.M. And Others - WRIT - C No. 2420 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 1295 (22 January 2007)

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. Dr. B.S. Chauhan, J.

Hon. Dilip Gupta, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.

In view of the order we propose to pass, it is not necessary to issue notice to the private respondent.

The petitioner who is the Gram Pradhan has stated that the construction of the Primary School is going on and accordingly to the Government Orders issued from time to time, the Head Master of the School should be made In-charge of the building and in the instant case, the Head Master was made the In-charge of the construction of the building but he was substituted by another teacher and subsequently under political pressure the respondent no.3 who is merely an Assistant Teacher has been appointed as In-charge of the construction of the building. The petitioner has submitted that he should be removed and Head Master of the institution should be made the In-charge of the construction of the building.

Learned Standing Counsel submitted that the matter may be relegated to the District Collector concerned who will examine the issue and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law after hearing the petitioner as well as the respondent no.3.

In view of the submission made by the learned Standing Counsel, we dispose of the Writ Petition requesting the learned District Collector, Allahabad to consider the grievance of the petitioner and pass an appropriate order after giving an opportunity to the petitioner as well as the representatives of respondent no.2 and 3 expeditiously preferably within a period of four weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is produced by the petitioner before him.

Date: 22.1.2007

GS-2420-07

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

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.