HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 14874 of 2025 Court No. - 52 HON'BLE MRS. MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State and Sri Shivendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for respondent-BSA. 2. The petitioner has preferred instant writ petition challenging an order dated 16.07.2025 passed by District Basic Education Officer, District-Shamli (for short, 'the BSA') and for a direction upon the BSA to grant maternity leave to the petitioner for a period of 180 days i.e. from 16.07.2025 to 11.01.2026. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner's application for maternity leave has been rejected on the ground of non-fulfillment of two years gap between the first and second maternity leave and consequently the order impugned has been passed, which is arbitrary, illegal and unsustainable in the eyes of law and the same may be quashed. In support of his submission, he has relied upon the judgements passed by this Court in the cases of Dr. Rachna Chaurasiya vs. State of U.P. & Ors., Neutral Citation:-2017:AHC:99779-DB and Smt. Anupam Yadav Vs. State of U.P. And 2 Others, passed in Writ A No.9535 of 2022, on 21.10.2022. 4. Learned counsel for respondent-BSA could not dispute the aforesaid fact. 5. Having considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and the law as settled in the judgements, referred to herein-above, learned counsel for the petitioner has made out a case. The impugned order dated 16.07.2025 passed by BSA is quashed and the matter is remitted to the District Basic Education Officer, Shamli for decision afresh, ignoring the delay if any, on merits, in accordance with the observations made in Dr. Rachna Chaurasiya (supra) and Smt. Anupam Yadav (supra), by means of a reasoned and speaking order, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, expeditiously, preferably, within a period of six weeks from today, if there is no legal impediment. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition stands allowed. 7. No order as to costs. October 6, 2025 DS Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Sanjay Kumar Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Shivendra Kumar Singh (Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.) Sangeeta Rani .....Petitioner(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) Digitally signed by :- DIGAMBER SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad