High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Nand Lal Gupta (Assistant Teacher) v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. 8532 of 2007  RD-AH 2641 (19 February 2007)
Court No. 39
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 8532 of 2007
Nand Lal Gupta
State of U.P. & others
Hon'ble V.K. Shukla,J
Petitioner has contended that he has been functioning as Assistant Teacher and additional charge of Nirman Prabhari of Primary School, Barwatola which is situated in Gram Sabha, Arangpani Block Myorpur, Sonbhadra. Petitioner was relieved from being Incharge of the construction of the school building and instead one Ramashanker Singh alongwith Pradhan of Gram Panchayat was authorized to carry out construction. Petitioner approached this Court by preferring Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 57731 of 2006 (Nand Lal Gupta Vs. State of U.P. and others). This Court made categorical observations while entertaining the writ petition that in the opinion of the Court such orders which withdraws the additional responsibilities given to Assistant Teachers/Headmaster do not warrant any interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, and further petitioner has no legal right to maintain the present writ petition for his continuance as In-charge of the constructions of the building. After said observations has been made as petitioner had already represented the matter liberty was given to consider and decide the matter. Thereafter representation of the petitioner has been considered and has been decided. At this juncture present writ petition has been filed.
Learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri R.J.Singh, contended with vehemence that there is no objective consideration on the representation which was moved and as such writ petition deserves to be allowed.
Learned Standing counsel on the other hand contended that valid reason has been assigned and no interference is warranted and further none of the legal rights of petitioner has been infringed, as such writ petition deserves to be dismissed.
After respective arguments have been advanced factual position which is emerging is to the effect that on the earlier occasion when petitioner has approached this Court, this Court has clearly held that petitioner has no legal right to maintain the present writ petition for his continuance as In-charge of the constructions of the building and orders by which additional responsibilities had been withdrawn, the same does not warrant any interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and thus, on merit as far as this Court is concerned claim of the petitioner already stood rejected. Authority concerned was asked to decide the representation. While deciding representation categorical finding of fact has been arrived at that while undertaking construction activity there was lot of negligence and inaction on the part of the petitioner and till February, 2006 petitioner has not even commenced the work and on account of delay thereafter in construction, students had been suffering. Cogent reasons have been assigned as to why work has been taken from the petitioner and entrusted to another.
Consequently there is no occasion to interfere, as writ petition lacks substance and further none of the legal right of petitioner is infringed and as such same is dismissed.
19th February, 2007
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.