Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

C/M BHARTIYA UCHCHATTAR MADHYAMIK VIDYALAYA THRU ITS MANAGER versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


C/M Bhartiya Uchchattar Madhyamik Vidyalaya Thru Its Manager v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - C No. 59172 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 18402 (1 November 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).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Hon'ble Vineet Saran, J

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing counsel appearing for Respondents no. 1 and 2 and Sri R.K.Ojha for Respondent no.3. With consent of the learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is being disposed of at this stage without calling for a counter affidavit.

The petitioner is aggrieved by an order dated 13.10.2006 passed under section 5(1) of U.P. Act No.24 of 1971 directing single operation of the accounts of the petitioner-school. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the ground for passing the impugned order that the salary bills for the months of July to October, 2006 had not been submitted by the petitioner, is absolutely wrong as every month the said salary bills were submitted within the prescribed period but had not been cleared by the District Inspector of Schools. It has further been submitted that the impugned order has been passed without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

It is well settled law that in case if an order is to be passed against the interest of a particular party, the said party should be given notice and opportunity of hearing. Since in the present case the said notice had not been given and the impugned order has been passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, in my view, the same deserves to be set aside.

Accordingly, the order dated 13.10.2006 passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Gorakhpur, Respondent no.2, is hereby quashed. The District Inspector of Schools shall, Gorakhpur, however, be at liberty to pass fresh order, in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and the Respondent no.3 as well as other concerned parties, if there be any. The writ petition  stands allowed. No order as to cost.

Dt/-1.11.2006

dps

w.p. 59172.06


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.