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


Saket Behari Pandey v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. 21039 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 7942 (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. 21039 of 2007

Saket Behari Pandey


State of U.P and others

Hon'ble V.K.Shukla,J.

On 15.10.2003 after taking due permission from District Basic Education Officer, petitioner was adjusted to Primary Vidyalaya Dingurpatti, Kone Block district Mirzapur and petitioner's adjustment was continued. Petitioner has contended that thereafter petitioner adjustment has been cancelled and petitioner was asked to go to his original institution at Primary Vidyalaya, Kamasin-I. At this juncture present writ petition has been filed.

Sri Brijesh Kumar Yadav, Advocate appearing for petitioner contended with vehemence that in the present case petitioner has been metted with arbitrary treatment and in order to extend undue benefit to one Abdul Hafiz, respondent no. 5 said exercise has been undertaken as such impugned order is liable to be quashed.

Sri C.K. Rai, Advocate appearing for respondents on the other hand contended that petitioner has been adjusted and thereafter adjustment order has been revoked, as such none of the legal right of the petitioner has been infringed.

After respective arguments have been advanced, factual position which is emerging is to the effect that order dated 15.10.2003, petitioner was adjusted at Primary Vidyalaya Dingurpatti, Kone Block district Mirzapur. Petitioner submits that in terms of Government Order dated 05.05.2003 he has been confirmed.

Government Order dated 05.05.2003 has been perused. Said Government Order deals with the matter of adjustment of teacher in the institution and guidelines have been provided for but nowhere in the said Government Order provides that teacher who has been attached shall be confirmed, as such there is complete misreading on the part of the petitioner in regard to the confirmation. Fact of the matter is that petitioner was attached and thereafter his attachment has been withdrawn.

Transfer, posting, adjustment/attachment are all in the domain of the authorities concerned and it is for the authorities concerned to see as to where an incumbent should be posted and where his services should be best utilized.

In the present case order of attachment has been recalled and petitioner has been sent back to his original institution where he was posted earlier. Thus, no infirmity is found in recalling the order of attachment of the petitioner.

Consequently, writ petition lacks substance and is dismissed.




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.