SMT. ANUSUYA PATHAK versus CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

---

Smt. Anusuya Pathak v. Central Administrative Tribunal & others - WRIT - A No. 2093 of 2004 [2004] RD-AH 1354 (8 November 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).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Court No. 1

1. Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.18304 of 2002

Smt. Anusuya Pathak vs. Central Administrative Tribunal & others

2. Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.20931  of 2004

Smt. Anusuya Pathak vs. Central Administrative Tribunal & others

Hon'ble Yatindra Singh, J

Hon'ble VS Bajpai. J

1. Petitioner is a Primary teacher in Kendriya Vidyalay. She was transferred on 22.6.2001 from Bamrauli, Allahabad to Sitamarhi, Bihar. She filed an Original Application no. 901 of 2001 challenging her transfer order. This original application was disposed of on 27.7.2001 with the observation that the petitioner may file a representation. The petitioner filed a representation which was dismissed on 24.8.2001. The petitioner filed  second original application no. 1121 of 2001 challenging this order. This original application was disposed of on 15.2.2002 with some observations but the transfer order was upheld. The petitioner filed writ petition no. 18304 of 2002 against this order and obtained interim order on 7.5.2002. The respondents filed Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court and obtained stay  on 29.7.2002 of the interim order granted by this court on 7.5.2002. The SLP before the Supreme Court was converted into Civil Appeal no. 6459 of 2002. This appeal has been allowed on 30th September 2002 and the transfer order has been upheld. The petitioner filed contempt application for not complying the order of the Tribunal dated  15.2.2002 regarding payment of salary for the period that she was transferred. It has been dismissed on 21.4.2004, hence the present writ petition.

2. We have heard counsel for the petitioner and Sri DP Singh counsel for the respondent. The writ petition no. 18304 of 2002 is against the order of the Tribunal upholding the transfer. The Supreme Court has upheld the transfer order. In view of this writ petition no. 18304 of 2002 has become infructuous and it is dismissed.

3. The transfer order has ultimately been upheld by Supreme Court by order dated 30.9.2002. It is not disputed that petitioner has not taught for a single  day after she was transferred on 26.2.2001. In view of this she is not entitled salary for the period that she did not teach. There is no illegality in the order dismissing the contempt application. The writ petition no. 20931 of 2004 has no merit and dismissed. Let a copy of this order be placed in writ petition no. 20931 of 2004.

Dated: 5.11.2004

BBL

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 |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.