Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

C/M SRI GANDHI VIDYALAYA JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS THRU' MANAGER versus STATE OF U.P. & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


C/M Sri Gandhi Vidyalaya Junior High Schools Thru' Manager v. State Of U.P. & Others - SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 1314 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 16136 (1 October 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 AT ALLAHABAD

"CJ's Court"

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD.

APPELLATE JURISDICTION

Special Appeal No. 1314 of 2007.

1. Committee of Management, Sri Gandhi Vidyalaya

Junior High School, Tundla, District Firozabad

through its Manager-Pawan Kapoor .......Appellants.

Vs.

1. State of U.P., through Secretary, Basic Education,

U.P. Government, Lucknow.

2. Director of Education (Basic), U.P. Government,

Lucknow.

3. District Basic Education Officer, Firozabad.

4. Kishun Lal, s/o Late Sri Ram Singh, r/o

Mohalla Kothi Aitmadpur, District Agra.

.........Respondents.

*****

Counsel for the Appellant : Mr. S.K. Mishra

Counsel for the Respondents : Ms. Rashmi Tripathi

Mr. G.C. Upadhyaya

(Standing Counsel)

Hon'ble H.L. Gokhale, CJ.

Hon'ble Anjani Kumar, J.

Date : October 1, 2007

Oral Judgement (Per : H.L. Gokhale, CJ)

1. Heard Mr. S. K. Mishra in support of this appeal, Sri G.C. Upadhyaya, learned Standing Counsel appears for respondents no. 1, 2 and 3 and Ms. Rashmi Tripathi, learned counsel appears for respondent no.4.

2. The appeal is admitted.

3. The respondent no. 4 was working as a clerk in the appellant's institution. There were serious allegations in the functioning of the respondent no.4, which included tampering with the record of the employees and misbehaving with girls student. After an enquiry, those charges were held to be proved and the respondent no. 4 was directed to be dismissed from service.

4. The respondent no. 4 filed a writ petition before this Court. An interim order has been passed by learned single Judge granting the stay of the order passed against the respondent no.4.

5. Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant submits that in the facts of this case, no such stay was warranted. He further submits that in the matter of dismissal, unless there are strong circumstances, no such interim order shall be passed.

6. Ms. Tripathi justified the interim order. She, however submitted that the writ petition may at least be admitted, because the formal order has not been passed as yet. Mr. Mishra has no objection to the admission of the writ petition.

7. We accept the submission of Mr. Mishra that in facts of this case, the interim order was not called for at all.

8. In the result, the appeal is allowed. The order passed by learned single Judge is set aside. We, however direct that the writ petition be treated as admitted. The same will be heard in normal course. The appellant herein may file their counter affidavit to the writ petition, whereafter the respondent no.4 herein may apply to the concerned learned single Judge for early hearing of the writ petition.

Date : 01.10.2007.

Rks.

(Chief Justice)

(Anjani Kumar)


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.