PARMANAND DUBEY v. B.L. CHAURASIYA, DEPUTYD DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION AND ANOTHER
CAPL/9406/2023 · 2026-05-13
Rohit Ranjan Agarwal
body2023
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2023 DAILYLAW 3038 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2023 DAILYLAW 3038 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 9406 of 2023 Court No. - 9 HON'BLE ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J.
1. The writ Court on 04.04.2023 while allowing Writ-A No. 27395 of 2009 passed the following order:-
"1. Heard Sri A.C. Tiwari, Sri N.L. Pandey, Sri J.A. Azmi and Sri Akhilesh Kumar Singh learned counsel for petitioner and Sri V.B. Mishra, learned counsel for respondent-University in respective petitions.
2. In the writ petition, only question for consideration is whether petitioner, while working as Officiating Principal, entitled to salary for post of Principal. Relying on Statute 12.22 of the first Statute of Sampurnanand Sanskrit University, his salary as Officiating Principal was denied.
3. It is informed that aforesaid provision has been struck down by a learned Single Judge in Service Bench No. 1590 of 2008, Dr. Bramhanand Shukla Vs. State of U.P. through Secretary, High Education decided on 29.5.2019 relying upon a Full Bench Judgment of this Court in Dr. Jai Prakash Narayan Singh Vs. State of U.P. and others, [2014 (8) ADJ 617 (FB)]
4. Sri V. B. Mishra, learned counsel for University could not dispute aforesaid facts.
5. Thus, in view of aforesaid decisions and for the reasons given therein, this writ petition is allowed. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Purushottam Mani Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Parmanand Dubey .....Applicant(s) B.L. Chaurasiya, Deputyd Director Of Education And Another .....Opposite Party(s)
6. The petitioner shall be entitled for salary for the period he worked as Officiating Principal and it shall be paid by respondents expeditiously.
7. The entire exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of four months from the date of production of certified copy of this order."
2. Today, instructions have come from the State side, which are taken on record.
3. In the instructions, it has been stated that an amount of Rs. 55,94,117/- has been paid to the applicant complying the order of the writ Court.
4. In view of said fact, as the amount has been paid to the applicant, the present contempt application is rendered infructuous and stands dismissed. May 14, 2026 A. V. Singh CAPL No. 9406 of 2023 2 (Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.) Digitally signed by :- AJAY VIKRAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad