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


Rajesh Kumar Singh v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. 21114 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 7931 (27 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).


Court No. 39

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 21114 of 2007

Rajesh Kumar Singh


State of U.P and others

Hon'ble V.K.Shukla,J.

Petitioner has approached this Court questioning the validity of the decision dated 30.03.2007 passed by District Magistrate, Mirzapur directing the Gram Shiksha Samiti to pass resolution in favour of Smt. Laxmi Devi, respondent no. 8.

Brief background of the case is that an advertisement was published on 17.12.2005 for making selection and appointment of Shiksha Mitra. Last date was 30.12.2005 for moving application form alongwith all necessary testimonials, before the authority concerned. Petitioner as well as Smt. Laxmi Devi, respondent no. 8 both have applied for consideration of their claim as Shiksha Mitra. Petitioner has contended that his name was finalized but he was not sent for training. Petitioner has contended that he filed writ petition before this Court being Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 3623 of 2007 and this Court on 24.01.2007 asked the District Magistrate, concerned to decide the matter. Thereafter District Magistrate has proceeded to decide the matter. At this juncture present writ petition has been filed.  

Sri Udai Shakar Mishra, Advocate appearing for petitioner contended with vehemence that in the present case District Magistrate, Mirzapur has totally erred in law, inasmuch as, he failed to appreciate that last date of filling up application was 30.12.2005 and by the the last date at no point of time Smt. Laxmi Devi, respondent no. 8 has ever appended her certificate of Anudeshika (�?न�?द�?शि�?ा) alongwith the application and has even not mentioned in application form that she should be extended benefit of Anudeshika (�?न�?द�?शि�?ा) as such preference by virtue of being Anudeshika (�?न�?द�?शि�?ा) could not be extended to her but this important aspect of the matter has not been considered by the District Magistrate, Mirzapur, as such impugned order is liable to be quashed.

Sri Anuj Kumar, Advocate, Sri C.K. Rai, Advocate, and Sri Brijesh Pratap Singh, Advocate appearing for respondents contended that rightful view has been taken in the matter and impugned order warrants no interference.

On the basis of admitted position the matter is being decided, with the consent of parties.

After respective arguments have been advanced factual position which is emerging is to the effect that as per advertisement last date for filling up the application form was 30.12.2005 and by the said last date requisite application form had to be filled with all necessary testimonial. This is not disputed that Smt. Laxmi Devi, respondent no. 8 had applied for consideration of her claim for being appointed as Shiksha Mitra but the question to be adjudicated is as to whether before the last date she had appended certificate to get benefit of Anudeshika (�?न�?द�?शि�?ा) and whether she had mentioned that she should be extended benefit of Anudeshika (�?न�?द�?शि�?ा). District Magistrate, in the order dated 30.03.2007 at no point of time has cared to go in this important aspect of the matter whereas this important aspect of the matter went to the root of the matter. Smt. Laxmi Devi, respondent no. 8 could have been extended benefit of instructor only in case when she had applied for getting benefit of Instructor before the last date and after the last date no certificate and no request whatsoever was liable to be entertained and benefit of the same was liable to be extended.  On this facet of the matter as no exercise has been done by District Magistrate, as such order dated 30.03.2007 passed by District Magistrate, Mirzapur is hereby quashed. Matter is remitted back to the District Magistrate, for deciding afresh within next eight weeks after providing opportunity of hearing to petitioner Rajesh Kumar Singh and Smt. Laxmi Devi, respondent no. 8, in accordance with law. Whatever decision is so taken, same be communicated to the parties.

With the above directions present writ petition is allowed.

Date: 27.04.2007



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.