Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Smt. Omkanti Srivastava v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. 3287 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 1363 (24 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).


Hon. Ran Vijai Singh,J.

The petitioner  who happened  to be Assistant Teacher  in government Girls Inter College  Orai Jalaun has filed this writ petition for providing promotional scale. The case of the petitioner is that she was  appointed as Assistant Teacher  on 26/11/1976 and after completion of 10 years service  selection grade was given to her on 1.12.1986. Now she is  entitled  for promotional grade  but that has not been provided to her. In this regard  she has given a representation to the Principal of the College  on 25.4.2005 and that has been forwarded  by the Principal  on 31.5.2005 to   the District Inspector of Schools  thereafter it was sent to the Joint Director of Education who happened to be the competent authority since the Joint Director of Education  has not considered  the case of the petitioner for promotional grade. Hence the present writ petition.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.

The learned Counsel for the parties  are agreed  to dispose of the writ petition at this stage.

Considering the facts and  circumstances of the case, it is provided that the petitioner may file a  fresh representation before respondent No.2 In case any such representation is filed, it may be decided  by respondent No.2  by a speaking order, if possible, within two months from the date of receipt of the representation. The petitioner will file certified copy of this order, other necessary documents and a duly stamped self-addressed envelope along with the representation. The respondent No.2 after taking decision will communicate the same to the petitioner.

With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of.




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 |

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