Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

KAUSHAL NARAIN & OTHERS versus STATE OF U.P.& OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Kaushal Narain & Others v. State Of U.P.& Others - WRIT - A No. 12020 of 2000 [2005] RD-AH 5212 (7 November 2005)

 

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.27

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 12020 of 2000

Kaushal Narain           Vs.      State of  U.P. and others

     ........

Hon'ble Vikram Nath J.

It is alleged that in the year 1991 sixteen posts were advertised for filling up the vacancy of teachers in Saraswati Vidyalaya Inter College, Hapur, District Ghaziabad. According to the petitioner the management made selection                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    of  16 teachers which included the petitioner ( three in number). The DIOS was not granting financial approval to the appointments made by the Management. Aggrieved by the same two writ petitions were filed. Writ Petition No.20128 of 92 was filed by Sri Prabhat Kumar and 12 other teachers. Writ Petition No.8587 of 93 was filed by the present three petitioners.

Writ Petition No.20128 of 1992 was dismissed with further direction to the DIOS to hold selection by making fresh advertisement within a month from the date of production of certified copy of the order. It was further provided that pursuant  to the fresh advertisement in case the petitioners applly they shall be duly considered and while considering their case the experience gained by them while working in the institution will also be taken note of. It appears that fresh selection have already taken place pursuant to the aforesaid direction in the writ petition 20128 of 92. The writ petition 8587/93 filed by the petitioner came up for disposal subsequently and this court vide order dated 6.4.99 disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the DIOS to decide the question of grant of financial approval taking into consideration two aspects, firstly as to whether the papers with regard to the appointment of the petitioner was duly submitted and received by the DIOS and secondly there were vacancies available in the reserve quota. It appears that in 1999 when the writ petition of the petitioner was being heard the fact that the earlier writ petition had been dismissed with the direction to the DIOS to hold fresh selection after fresh advertisement was not pointed out. However, after receipt of the said direction in the petitioners writ petition the DIOS passed detailed order dated 15.2.2000 and relying upon all the aspects of the matter including the direction contained in the two writ petitions held that neither the reservation quota was taken into consideration nor the procedure required under law was followed and accordingly held that the petitioners' appointment by the Committee of Management was invalid. The DIOS further referred that the petitioners did not even apply against the fresh advertisement and did not take any advantage of the observations made in the order of this Court dated 25.2.96. It also mentions that pursuant to the order fresh appointment  of 12 teachers have already been made and they are getting their salary and in such circumstances also the petitioners are not entitled to get any relief.

From the above facts and circumstances , I do not find any merit in the petition. In case if the petitioners were aggrieved by the subsequent appointment  they should have adopted other remedy open to them before the appropriate forum.

This petition is accordingly dismissed.

Dt.7.11.2005

Hsc/


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.