MEENA YADAV v. STATE OF U.P.THRU SECY.BASIC EDUCATION AND ANR.
WRIA/37766/2018 · 2025-07-14
Abdul Moin
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 149592 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 149592 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:39995 Court No. - 5 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 37766 of 2018 Petitioner :- Meena Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P.Thru Secy.Basic Education And Anr. Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajesh Kumar,Komal Singh,Sanjay Kumar Mishra,Sanjay Singh,Sunil Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Shailendra Singh Rajawat Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner prays for and is permitted to implead Secretary, U.P. Basic Education Board, Prayagraj as respondent No.3 during the course of the day. Notice on behalf of respondent No.3 has been accepted by Shri Ran Vijay Singh, Advocate. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-State, Shri Shailendra Singh Rajawat, learned counsel for the respondents No.2 and Shri Ran Vijay Singh, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3. With the consent of learned counsel appearing for the contesting parties, the writ petition is finally being disposed of. After arguing at some length, learned counsel for the petitioner states that impugned termination order dated 27.05.2017, a copy of which is Annexure-8 to the petition, itself indicates that in case the petitioner is aggrieved by the said order he can file his objections against the same before the respondent No.3. He states that he could not file objections at that stretch of time and now he intends to file objections against the impugned termination order before respondent No.3 which may be
directed to be decided within a fixed time frame to which learned counsels for the respondents have no objection. In view of the aforesaid, the writ petition stands disposed of leaving it open to the petitioner to submit his objections against the termination
order dated 27.05.2017 before the respondent no.3 within a period of 2 weeks. In case the objections are filed, the respondent no.3 shall endevour to decide the same by means of a reasoned and speaking
order within a further period of eight weeks from the date of filing of the objections. It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits of the claim set forth by the petitioner.
Order Date :- 14.7.2025 prateek Digitally signed by :- PRATEEK ARORA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench