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


Brij Kishore And Another v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. - 56916 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 18064 (20 November 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'ble Ashok Bhushan, J.

Heard counsel for the petitioners.

By this writ petition the petitioners have prayed for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to accept the form of the petitioners under Shiksha Mitra category for Special B.T.C. Training Course 2007.

Petitioners' case in the writ petition is that the petitioner no. 1 joined as Shiksha Mitra in 2003-2004 and petitioner no. 2 in the year 2004-2005 and they are still working as Shiksha Mitra. Those Shiksha Mitra who have completed three academic years, have been held to be eligible for consideration in the category of Shiksha Mitra. In case the petitioners submit relevant certificate certifying their experience of three academic years, they are entitled to be considered in the category of Shiksha Mitra. Learned standing counsel submits that all the candidates have been permitted to represent whose names are not shown in the select list with their relevant materials.

In the facts of the present case ends of justice be served indisposing of the writ petition granting liberty to the petitioners to submit representation to the Principal District Institute of Education and Training and in case petitioners submit their representations after verifying the certificates of three years experience , their names be also considered in the category of Shiksha Mitra. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the forms have already been submitted.

With the above observations the writ petition is disposed of.

Let a certified copy of this order be issued to counsel for the petitioner within twenty four hours on payment of usual charges.




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.