Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:13376 Court No. - 7 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20031 of 2024 Petitioner :- Shamsiya Khatoon Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shahabuddin Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pradeep Kumar Tripathi Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J. 1. Heard Shri Sanjeev Singh, learned counsel along-with Shri Shahabuddin, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of State-respondents as well as Shri Pranav Mishra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent No.2. 2. The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition challenging the order dated 14.11.2024 passed by the District Minority Welfare Officer, Mau/ Respondent No. 3 (Annexure-1) to the writ petition. 3. By the aforesaid order, petitioner while working on the post of Regular Principal was removed from the said post and in her place the Respondent No. 5 namely Smt. Rashida Khatoon was directed to work on the post of Officiating Principal. 4. It is argued that aforesaid order has been passed without any notice or opportunity to the petitioner. It is further argued that aforesaid order was passed since certain retiral dues were not paid to one Smt. Fatma Shameem who alleged to be superannuated on 31.03.2024. 5. Vide order dated 16.12.2024, District Minority Welfare Officer, Mau was directed to file his personal affidavit disclosing the status of the terminal benefits / death benefits payable to Smt. Fatma Shamim (since deceased). Since the aforesaid order was not complied with, vide order dated 22.01.2025, the District Minority Welfare Officer, Mau was directed to appear before this Court. 6. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, a compliance affidavit has been filed by the District Minority Welfare Officer, Mau/ Respondent No. 3 along-with an application for exemption. 7. Dr. Rajeswar Tripathi, learned Chief Standing Counsel-II along- with Vijay Shankar, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, put up their appearance on behalf of Respondent No. 3. In paragraph-7 of the affidavit filed on behalf of Respondent No. 3 it is stated that since he has no knowledge in respect of the order dated 16.12.2024 passed by this Court, no instructions were provided by him. It is further stated in the aforesaid affidavit that terminal benefits of Smt. Fatma Shamim has been sanctioned and thereafter a sum of Rs. 1092927/- has already been transferred in the bank account of son of Late Fatma Shamim by UTR No. RBI0242574674240, copy of which is appended as Annexure-1 to the compliance affidavit. It is further stated in the said affidavit that various letters were written to the petitioner for the payment of terminal dues of Late Smt. Fatma Shamim and since the same was not paid by the petitioner, the order in question has been passed against her. 8. On the other hand, it is argued by Shri Sanjeev Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner that since there is alimony in the service record of Late Smt. Fatma Shamim regarding the date of birth, the papers and documents were not forwarded. It is argued by him that in certain places the date of birth of Smt. Fatma Shamim (since deceased) is mentioned as 1971 and at certain places as 1961. It is further argued that since necessary payments has already been made to the son of the deceased -Smt. Fatma Shamim, the order dated 14.11.2024 passed against the petitioner is liable to be recalled. 9. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record. 10. From perusal of the record, it is clear that instructions were not provided by the Respondent No. 3 pursuant to the order dated 16.12.2024, since the necessary information was not received in his office. Now in the compliance affidavit filed by him it is stated that the terminal dues has already been paid to the son of the deceased. 11. In this view of the matter, the Court is of the opinion that since the allegations made against the petitioner in the impugned order has already been removed and the necessary payments have already been made, the Respondent No.3 is directed to take a fresh decision in respect of continuance of petitioner as regular Principal in the institution in question within a period of ten days' from today. The decision will be taken strictly in accordance with law. 12. Order impugned dated 14.11.2024 will be subject to the outcome of the order passed by the Respondent No. 3. 13. In view of above, the writ petition is disposed of finally. 14. Personal appearance of the officer present in the court today is hereby exempted. Order Date :- 27.1.2025 Swati Digitally signed by :- SWATI PATHAK High Court of Judicature at Allahabad