Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 137663 (ALL)

MANOJ KUMAR AZAD v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. CHIEF SECY. SECONDARY EDU. LKO. AND 3 OTHERS

WRIA/4767/2025 · 2025-05-01

Rajesh Singh Chauhan

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:25019 Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4767 of 2025 Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar Azad Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Secondary Edu. Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Krishna Madhav Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J. 1. Heard Shri K. M. Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Nitin Mathur, learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents. 2. In view of the proposed order, notice to opposite party No.4 is hereby dispensed with. 3. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:- "(i) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus thereby commanding and directing the opposite parties to revise the pay scale and seniority of the petitioner treating him to be selected on the post of Assistant Teachers from 14.09.2010, the date when the result was declared first time. (ii) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus thereby commanding and directing the opposite parties to pay the arrears of salary (if any) to the petitioner, alongwith interest at the prevailing market rate." 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that for redressal of his grievance, the petitioner has preferred representation dated 31.12.2024 (Annexure No.9) to the competent authority but to no avail. He has further submitted that the petitioner is ready to prefer a fresh representation to the Competent Authority, therefore, he may be permitted to prefer a fresh representation to the opposite party No.2 i.e., Director of Education (Secondary) U.P. Lucknow and a direction may be issued to him to consider and decide the said representation of the petitioner with expedition. 5. Learned Standing Counsel has no objection if direction for disposal of the said representation is issued. 6. Therefore, in view of the above, without entering into merits of the issue, I hereby dispose of this petition finally at the admission stage giving liberty to the petitioner to prefer a fresh representation to the opposite party No.2 i.e., Director of Education (Secondary) U.P. Lucknow ventilating his grievance taking all pleas and grounds which are available with him enclosing therewith the copy of his earlier representation, if any, which are necessary for disposal of the representation within a period of fifteen days from today and if such representation is preferred by the petitioner within the aforesaid stipulated time, the authority concerned shall consider and dispose of the same strictly, by speaking and reasoned order in accordance with law after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, if it is so required, with expedition preferably, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and the decision thereof shall be intimated to the petitioner forthwith. 7. This writ petition is disposed of, in view of the aforesaid terms. Order Date :- 1.5.2025 Reena/- (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- REENA KANNAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench