MOHD. SHAHID versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

---

Mohd. Shahid v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - C No. 59612 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 18441 (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 the respondents. With the 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 Head Master of Mohammadi High School, Baraut, Allahabad. The contention is that according to the relevant Government Order, the last date for submission of the forms of Class IX students of the college was 3.10.2006. However, on 3.10.2006 the requisite fee could not be deposited because of flaw in the computer of the State Bank of India through which the deposit has to be made. Then on 4.10.2006 the requisite fee was deposited by the petitioner and thereafter the petitioner approached the District Inspector of Schools for issuance of requisite forms, which have not yet been given to him.

The submission is that because of non-issuance of the forms the 242 students of the college would not be able to appear in the High School Examination, 2007-08, thereby causing irreparable loss to such students. The contention is that the requisite deposit could not be made within time because of reasons beyond the control of the petitioner and for no fault of the petitioner and as such the students of the college could not be made to suffer.

Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this writ petition is finally disposed of with the direction that in case if the requisite deposit had been made on 4.10.2006 and the petitioner had already completed all other formalities with regard to issuance of the forms within time specified in the relevant Government Order, the District Inspector of Schools shall issue the forms to the petitioner within one week of the receipt of the certified copy of this order or he may pass appropriate reasoned orders for not issuing the same within the same period.

With the aforesaid observations/directions, this writ petition is finally disposed of. No order as to costs.

Dt/-1.11.2006

p.s.

w.p.59612.06

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.