Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:14407 Court No. - 5 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10945 of 2020 Petitioner :- Mamta Srivastava Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy.Basic Edu. Lko. And Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- A.Z. Siddiqui,Ghaus Beg Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Uday Veer Singh,Vindhya Washini Kumar Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.1, Shri Ran Vijay Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.2 and Dr. Uday Veer Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents No.3 & 4. 2. The instant petition has been filed praying for a mandamus commanding the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion on the post of Headmistress of Primary School w.e.f. 31.12.2008 i.e. the date when the juniors to the petitioner have been given promotion. 3. Bereft of unnecessary details, the facts set forth by learned counsel for the petitioner are that the petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Teacher (Untrained) on compassionate grounds vide order dated 05.10.2000, a copy of which is annexure 1 to the petition. Her services were terminated vide order dated 28.05.2009, a copy of which is annexure 4 to the petition, on account of she not having requisite qualification for the post. 4. The said order was challenged by the petitioner by filing a Writ Petition No.3583(S/S) of 2009 in Re: Mamta Srivastava vs. U.P. Basic Education Board Alld. & Others. This Court, vide judgment and order dated 21.04.2010, a copy of which is annexure 5 to the petition, quashed the termination order of the petitioner and the respondents were directed to allow the petitioner to continue on the post of Assistant Mistress and be paid salary. 5. In pursuance thereof, the petitioner was reinstated in service. 6. Subsequently, vide order dated 31.05.2013, a copy of which is annexure 8 to the petition, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Head Mistress in pay band 9300-34800. 7. The petitioner staked her claim for being promoted as Head Mistress w.e.f. the date her juniors were promoted i.e. 31.12.2008 which order, as per the specific averment made in para 11 of the petition, comprised of various persons junior to the petitioner. The copy of the promotion order dated 31.12.2008 is annexed as annexure No.2 to the petition. 8. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that once the juniors of the petitioner were promoted as Headmistress on 31.12.2008 and the petitioner has been promoted on 31.05.2013, consequently, she is entitled for being promoted w.e.f. the date her juniors were promoted with all consequential benefits. 9. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also invited the attention of the Court towards the averments made in paragraph 9 of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent No.3 wherein the respondents have specifically admitted that the candidates promoted on 31.12.2008 include juniors of the petitioner. 10. Learned counsels appearing for the respondents are also unable to controvert the averments as made by them in the counter affidavit, more particularly in paragraph 9, wherein the specific averment of the juniors of the petitioner having been promoted vide order dated 31.12.2008 has been made. 11. Considering the aforesaid, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.3 i.e. District Basic Education Officer, Gonda to consider the claim of the petitioner for promotion as Headmistress w.e.f. the date her juniors were promoted i.e. 31.12.2008, as per rules, provided there is no legal impediment. 12. Let such consideration be done within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Order Date :- 10.3.2025 S. Shivhare Digitally signed by :- SHASHANK SHIVHARE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench