Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

CHANDRA SHEKHAR JOSHI versus DISTRICT INSPECTOROF SCHOOLS, SAHARANPUR & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Chandra Shekhar Joshi v. District Inspectorof Schools, Saharanpur & Others - SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 1321 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 16221 (3 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

Special Appeal No.1321 of 2007.

Chandra Shekhar Joshi

Vs.

The District Inspector of Schools & others.

Hon'ble H.L. Gokhale, CJ.

Hon'ble Anjani Kumar, J.

Date : 3rd October, 2007.

P.C.

1. Heard Sri Ghildyal in support of this appeal. Mr. G.K. Singh appears for respondent no.4. Mr. Tiwari, standing counsel, is present on behalf of respondents no.1 and 2.

2. Respondent no.4 had filed a writ petition in the year 1989 seeking to challenge the order dated 3rd May 1989 issued by the District Inspector of Schools, Saharanpur. Respondent no.4 was to be discontinued having been rendered surplus under that order. As a result of an interim order of this Court the respondent no.4 had continued during the pendency of the writ petition.

3. Now the writ petition filed by respondent no.4 has been allowed. Being aggrieved by that the appellant has filed this appeal because he fears that he will be dislodged as a result of the order passed by learned Single Judge.

4. As far as submissions of the appellant are concerned, they will be examined on next date. What is surprising is that the writ petition was filed in the year 1989 and reached for final hearing and was decided in the year 2007. The District Inspector of Schools did not care to file any counter affidavit to defend his order. During this entire period the appellant as well as respondent no.4 both continued to be paid their salary as teacher in Sanskrit.

5. We do not know what steps were taken by the District Inspector of Schools to get the stay order vacated. He has not even cared to file counter affidavit before the single Judge. We also want to know that whether there is requirement of two teachers in the concerned institution and if there is none, how the salary was paid to two teachers and how it should be recovered. We expect a proper affidavit from the District Inspector of Schools.

6. Notice will also be given to the Committee of Management, respondent no.3, returnable on 31st October 2007.

7. In the meantime service of the appellant will not be discontinued and he will continue to be paid salary until further orders.

Date : 03.10.2007.

mhu.

(Chief Justice)

(Anjani Kumar,J.)


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.