Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SMT. NEERAJ KUMARI versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Smt. Neeraj Kumari v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. 69195 of 2006 [2007] RD-AH 613 (10 January 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

Hon'ble Rakesh Tiwari, J.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The counter affidavits filed are taken on record.

By order dated 7.7.2005 passed in Writ Petition No. 46899 of 2005 the Court had directed the District Magistrate to consider and decide the petitioner's representation dated 31.5.2005 preferably within a period of two months from the date of production of a certified copy of the order after giving opportunity of hearing to the affected persons in accordance with law. The aforesaid order implied that the petitioner would produce the copy of the order before the District Magistrate.

The petitioner has not averred that as to when the certified copy of the order was produced by her before the District Magistrate. It also appears from the counter affidavit filed by the District Magistrate that he joined the post on 29.4.2006. Why the representation was not decided by the District Magistrate but by the erstwhile Basic Shiksha Adhikari Sri Hifzul Rehman who passed the order dated 2.5.2006 deciding the representation of the petitioner in contraventin of the order of this Court dated 7.7.2005?  From the counter affidavit filed by the present Basic Shiksha Adhikari who states to have joined on 25.10.2006 it appears that the then Basic Shiksha Adhikari Sri Hifzul Rehman has been suspended for deciding the representation of the petitioner but that does not absolve him from his act in defiance of the orders of this Court.

In the circumstances, the District Magistrate shall decide the representation of the petitioner within a period of one month from today by a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law. It is further directed that Sri Hifzul Rehman who is under suspension and is attached with the office of the Joint Director of Education, Agra shall be present in Court on the next date of hearing in person to explain as to why he decided the representation of the petitioner when the direction to decide the representation of the petitioner was for the District Magistrate who is not present today.  

The District Magistrate as well as the Basic Shiksha Adhikari shall in the circumstances be present on the next date of listing.

The question of exemption of the present Basic Shiksha Adhikari and the District Magistrate who have filed the affidavits will be considered on the next date of listing.

List this case on 12.2.2007.

A copy of this order shall be given to the learned Standing Counsel for informing Sri Hifzul Rehman in this regard within a week so that he may file his counter affidavit by the next date of listing and may be able to remain present in Court.

Dated: 10.1.2007

Rpk/

 


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.