Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

ASHISH SINGH versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Ashish Singh v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. 19971 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 7988 (30 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. 39

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No 19971 of 2007

Ashish Singh

Versus

State of U.P. and others

Hon'ble V.K. Shukla,J.

Petitioner claims that he has been appointed as Assistant Teacher in attached primary section of  Sri Ram Kripal Rashtriya Higher  Secondary School, Tikari Hanumanganj,l Allahabad.  on 20.7.2001. Petitioner claims that pursuant thereto he joined on 27.7.2001. Petitioner has contended that attached primary section is also included in the grant-in-aid list of the State Government, but no steps whatsoever has been undertaken for ensuring payment to him and as such petitioner has approached this court for issuing writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to ensure payment of salary as Assistant Teacher working in attached primary section  of Sri Ram Kripal Rashtriya Higher  Secondary School, Tikari Hanumanganj,l Allahabad.

      On the presentation of the writ petition, in the entire body of the writ petition, most  conspicuous feature is that no where educational qualification of petitioner has been described,  and even appointment letter does not mention  educational qualification of petitioner. This court on 19.4.2007 directed Sri Ajeet Kumar Singh, Advocate to indicate as to what is the educational qualification and what is the training qualification of petitioner.

For the purpose of being appointed as Assistant Teacher in attached primary section, educational qualification has been provided in Appendix-A of Chapter -II of U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 for teachers  teaching Class 6,7 and 8, is Intermediate Examination and C.T., B.T.C. or J.T.C. or any other equivalent training qualification  and for teachers teaching  in primary class 1st  to 5th  High School examination and  J.T.C., B.T.C. or H.T.C. or any other equivalent educational qualification. Petitioner has miserably failed to  point out as to whether he possess requisite qualification of J.T.C., B.T.C. or H.T.C.. or it is equivalent  qualification. As petitioner has miserably failed to point out  details of his educational qualification specified therei, inspite of time being accorded, consequently, Court has no option but to dismiss the  writ petition.

No order as to cost.

Dt. 30.4.2007

T.S.


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.