Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SAYYED YUSUF RAZA ZAIDI versus STATE OF U.P. THRU' SECY. BASIC SHIKSHA PARISHAD AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Sayyed Yusuf Raza Zaidi v. State Of U.P. Thru' Secy. Basic Shiksha Parishad And Others - WRIT - A No. 23052 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 9263 (15 May 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. 23052  of 2007

Sayyed Yusuf Raza Zaidi

Versus

State of U.P. and others.

Hon'ble V.K. Shukla,J.

Petitioner has approached this court requesting therein that writ of mandamus be issued restraining the respondent from retiring him on 30.6.2007, treating his date of birth to be  1.5.1945 as  Headmaster of Primary School No. 43, Aligarh and further  for issuance of  writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to permit  petitioner to work as Headmaster of Primary School No. 43, Aligarh till 30.6.2009 in lieu of his date  of birth as 11.9.1946.

Petitioner claims that he was  he was appointed as Assistant Teacher on 9.4.1973 at   Primary School No. 43, Aligarh, Balika Primary School duly managed by Nagar Nigam, Aligarh. Petitioner has contended that he was promoted as Headmaster on 13.1.2003 and he has been performing and discharging his duty. Petitioner claims that his actual date of birth is 11.9.1946. On 21.1.2007 letter was  issued by the  Nagar Shiksha Adhikari, Aligarh,  stating therein as per their record, date of birth  of petitioner is 1.5.1945,  and petitioner would retire on 30.6.2007.  It was also mentioned that first page of service book which contains name, date of birth and qualification are missing in this background. Petitioner was asked to submits documents.  Petitioner has contended that he has submitted his reply on 5.2.2007. Petitioner has taken stand that his actual date of birth is  11.9.1946 and as such he cannot be retired on 30.6.2007. Petitioner has contended that he along with his reply, has submitted degree of B.Com of Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, Character Certificate of Principal, Hind Inter College, Sambhal, District Moradabad, Mark Sheet of Intermediate, School leaving certificate, Scholar Register and Transfer School form. Petitioner has contended that on 1.5.1.5.2007 clerk of the office of  District Basic Education Officer, Aligarh had sent retirement paper for filling up, but petitioner has refused to do so. Petitioner has contended  that in this background, prayer which has been made be accorded to him.

On the matter being taken up today, specific query was put up by this court  from Sri Divakar Rai sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner, as to why and under what circumstances, High School Certificate and mark sheet  of Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad, U.P. at Allahabad has not been appended, which was the best piece  of evidence  to demonstrate the date of birth of petitioner, inasmuch petitioner has passed High school Examination and on the basis of the same  has entered into service.  Each and every relevant and  is relevant documents have been appended, but High School Certificate and Mark sheet have not at all been appended, which would have answered all the queries, which have been sought to be raised  and actual date of birth recorded in High School Certificate would have been on the surface. Once petitioner has deliberately and intentionally withheld the High School Certificate  by not producing it before this court, then inevitable conclusion is  that date of birth, which has been recorded in respect of  petitioner, is correct date of birth. The other documents, which have been filed are of no consequence.  Once  in the record of respondents, date of birth, which has been recorded  is 1.5.1945 and not 11.9.1946 as has claimed by the petitioner, then no relief can be accorded. This court cannot proceed to accept the date of birth of petitioner as 11.9.1946, once authority concerned in their wisdom  have found  that petitioner's date of birth as per record  is 1.5.1945, then at the fag end of retirement, such disputed question of fact cannot be entertained.

Consequently, writ petition lacks substance and same is dismissed.

Dt. 15.5.2007

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.