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


Shyam Narain Yadav v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. 8123 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 15796 (11 September 2006)


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.7

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.60342 of 2005

Committee of Management  and another


State of U.P.  and others

Connected with

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.8123 of 2006

Shyam Narain Yadav


State of U.P.  and others

Hon. Sanjay Misra, J.

These are two connected writ petitions. The first having been filed by the Committee of Management, Shahganj Public Inter College, Shahganj, Jaunpur through its Manager Sri Ashok Kumar Sinha and another whereby the order dated 23.9.2004 passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Jaunpur ( annexure-4 to the writ petition) has been challenged. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the approval  granted by the DIOS to the respondent no.5 was illegal in as much as there was dispute with respect to Committee of Management as also the functioning of the Principal at that time who has been subsequently charge sheeted and as such process of appointment initiated by the Committee of Management was without jurisdiction. It is contended that the appointment order dated 15.9.2003 which has been approved by the DIOS was forged and fake document. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that against the same order the petitioner has filed representation which is pending before the DIOS and the same has not been decided.

In the second writ petition filed by Shyam Narain Yadav the prayer has been made that respondents be  directed to ensure the


payment of salary to the petitioner on the post of peon from the date of his joining i.e. 21.9.2003 in the institution since his appointment has been duly approved by the DIOS vide order dated 23.9.2004.

Counter affidavit and rejoinder affidavit have been exchanged between the parties and these writ petitions are being disposed of finally at this stage with consent of learned counsel for the parties.

The main contention of the Committee of Management while resisting the claim of the petitioner is that the  appointment letter issued by the Principal of the Institution and the selection process initiated   by the alleged  Committee of Management was without jurisdiction. It is stated   that the appointment letter dated 15.9.2003 filed as annexure-4 to the writ petition is forged and fake document. It is also contended that the  appointment, if any, as alleged, is also bad for the reason that the post was to be filled by a  general category candidate whereas it has been filled up by an  OBC candidate.

From the pleadings and submissions of the learned counsel for the parties it appears that there is a serious dispute on  factual issues. At the time when prior approval for appointment  was taken the institution was under the management of the S.D.M. and it is contended  that no such approval was accorded and as  such the document was forged and fictitious. The  Committee of Management has not been heard by the DIOS who has held that the appointment of Shyam Narain Yadav was made in accordance with law. This court is not in a position to adjudicate as to whether the documents are genuine or forged. The DIOS has not addressed this factual issue nor he has invited  the Committee of Management  for their version.

In the interest of justice it would be proper that the disputed   factual issues  may be decided by the Joint Director of Education, Varanasi since a decision on the disputed facts by an authority competent to do so is necessary. In view of above, it is directed that Joint Director of  Education, Varanasi will decide the representation


dated 1.11.2004 of the Committee of Management if it is in lawful control of the institution  in accordance with law after giving an opportunity to Shyam Narain Yadav as also to the said Committee of Management after obtaining comments from the DIOS regarding the findings recorded in the impugned order dated 23.9.2004. The Joint Director of Education, Varanasi will  decide the disputed factual issues preferably  within a period of four months from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him.  It is also directed  that the claim of the petitioner if it is found to be correct by respondent no.2 suitable directions  with respect to payment of his  salary may be issued  thereon. It is made clear that the Committee of Management ( petitioner in W.P.No.60342 of 2005) as well as Shyam Narain Yadav (petitioner in W.P.No.8123 of 2006) will  not seek any unnecessary adjournments in the proceedings before the respondent no.2.  In order to get the matter decided expeditiously the parties agree to appear before the Joint Director of Education, Varanasi between 18th to 22nd September, 2006 alongwith necessary objections and other documents upon which they place reliance.

In view of the aforesaid directions, both the writ petitions are disposed of  finally. No order is passed as to costs.




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.