Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

DAMYANTI DEVI & OTHERS versus STATE OF U.P. THRU' SECY. MAHILA AWAS BAL VIKAS & ORS.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Damyanti Devi & Others v. State Of U.P. Thru' Secy. Mahila Awas Bal Vikas & Ors. - WRIT - A No. 13098 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 5789 (2 April 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 OF ALLAHABAD

Court No. 38

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.13098  of 2007

Damyanti Devi and others             Versus            State of U.P. and others

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vineet Saran

The dispute in this writ petition relates to the selection and appointment of Aanganbari Karyakatri/Sahayika of Block Mohammadabad, District Ghazipur.

By an order dated 6.11.2006 passed by the Respondent no.1, the selection of the petitioners have been cancelled which was communicated by the Bal Vikas Pariyojna Adhikari, Block Mohammadabad, District Ghazipur, Respondent no.5, vide order dated 11.11.2006. Aggrieved by the said orders the petitioners, who are 12 in number, have filed this writ petition.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents. Learned counsel for the parties state that in an identical case (being Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 69131 of 2006) relating to the selections of Aanganbari Karyakatri/Sahayika in Block Jamaniya, District Ghazipur, this Court has today passed a detailed order and this writ petition can also be disposed of in terms of the said order. After holding that the cancellation of the petitioners on the respective posts of Aanganbari Karyakatri/Sahayika needs to be reconsidered, this Court partly allowed the said writ petition with the following directions:-

"Each individual petitioner who still remains aggrieved, may file a comprehensive representation before the District Magistrate, Ghazipur. While making such representation, besides stating their cases, they shall meet the specific ground on which their appointment has been cancelled, which has been stated in the individual case of each petitioner vide order dated 6.11.2006. They may also file their relevant documents in support of their case. The District Magistrate shall thereafter, either himself or through some other competent officer who may not be below the rank of Additional District Magistrate, enquire into the matter. While making such enquiry, the said officer shall obtain the report from the Child Development Project Officer and the District Programme Officer of the concerned Block and thereafter shall pass appropriate reasoned order, in each individual case, on the representation of the petitioners as expeditiously as possible, preferably within three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order before the District Magistrate, Ghazipur, Respondent no.3. It is made clear that each petitioners may not be required to be given personal hearing unless so required by the District Magistrate or the officer inquiring into the matter. However, the said officer shall meet the grounds mentioned in the representations while passing the order.

In view of the fact that while entertaining this writ petition, vide order dated 19.12.2006 it had been directed that "any action taken during this period, same shall abide by final orders to be passed by this Court", it is provided that in case if any other person has already been given appointment as Aanganbari Karyakatri/Sahayika on which post the petitioners claim to be entitled to, the authority shall pass order only after giving show cause notice to the said selected candidate.

This writ petition stands partly allowed to the extent indicated above. No order as to cost"

Accordingly, with consent of the learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition stands disposed of in terms of and directions issued vide Judgment and Order dated 2.4.2007 in writ petition no. 69131 of 2006 Smt. Shashi Kala Dubey and others Vs. State of U.P. and others.

No order as to cost.

dt.  2.4.2007

dps


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.