Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SMT. SEEMA DEVI versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Smt. Seema Devi v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. 20922 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 7844 (26 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

Hon'ble Vineet Saran, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondents no.1 and 2, Sri Anuj Kumar for respondent no.4 and Sri P.D.Tripathi for respondents no.3 and 5. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is being disposed of without calling for a counter affidavit.

The grievance of the petitioner is that her application for appointment as Shiksha Mitra has been rejected on the ground that her certificate was forged. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the said order has been passed without making any enquiry with regard to the genuineness of the certificate of the petitioner. With regard to such grievances, the petitioner has already filed representation before the respondent-authorities, which has yet not been decided.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this writ petition is finally disposed of with the direction that in case if, with regard to her grievances made in this writ petition, the petitioner files a fresh comprehensive representation before the District Magistrate, Jaunpur, respondent no.2 alongwith a certified copy of this order, the same shall be considered and decided by the said respondent, in accordance with law, after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and other concerned persons, if there be any, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of one month from the date of filing of the same.

With the aforesaid observations/directions, this writ petition is finally disposed of. No order as to cost.  

Dt/-26.4.2007

Ru

w.p.20922.07


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.