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


Smt.Sheelmani Sharma v. State Of U.P. & Others - WRIT - A No. 38118 of 1998 [2004] RD-AH 1059 (6 October 2004)


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. 26

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.38118 of 1998

Smt.Sheel Mani Sharma           Versus    State of U.P. and others


Hon'ble Vikram Nath J.

This petition has been filed with the prayer to direct the respondent to appoint and treat the petitioner as principal of respondent Institution since 1.7.1996 and pay salary and other emoluments admissible on the basis of such appointment.

I have heard Sri Lokendra Kumar learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel.

Notices were issued to the Committee of Management of the said Institution (Respondent no.5) and also Smt.Kanees Fatima, Officiating Principal(respondent no.6). The office has put up the report that neither the A/D card has been received nor undelivered cover has been received.. No counter affidavit has been filed either any of the respondents.

The contention of the petitioner is that applications were invited for filling the post of Principal in the said Institution, which admittedly is a minority Institution. The Interview was held by the Committee of Management on 30.6.96 .In para 5 of the petition it is stated that a panel of three candidates was prepared by the Committee which placed the petitioner at Sl.No.2.. The selection of Smt.Azra Hijab placed at Sl.No.1 was cancelled. Respondent no.2 made an enquiry and found experience certificate of Smt. Azra Hijab forged. In the circumstances, claim of the petitioner is that she should have been given the appointment on the post of Principal being the next in the panel but the Management Committee has appointed Smt.Kaneej Fatima(Respondent no.6) who had been placed at Sl.No.3 in the panel. It is further stated by the petitioner that during the pendency of the petition, the petitioner has retired. Various representations made by the petitioner regarding appointment as Principal are pending before the Deputy Director of Education (Agra region) Agra. The said representation as to whether the petitioner was entitled to be appointed as Principal or not, has not been decided. The learned Standing Counsel has pointed out that now it is the Joint Director of Education Agra Region, which is the concerned authority to decide the representation of the petitioner.

In the circumstances, the Joint Director of Education (Agra Region) Agra is directed to decide the representations of the petitioner dated 2.12.96 and 21.8.97 within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. It will however, be open to the petitioner to file a fresh representation along with a certified copy of this order.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed off.




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.