Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:27099 Court No. - 7 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 2182 of 2025 Petitioner :- Bandana Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Deepak Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Harsh Vardhan Gupta Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Harsh Vardhan Gupta, learned counsel for respondent No.2. 2. The petitioner has preferred the present petition with the following prayer:- "(I) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus direct the respondent No.3 to pay the pending salary of the petitioner i.e. May 2017 to till date." 3. Facts in brief as contained in the writ petition are that against the termination of the service of the petitioner, the petitioner along with other has preferred Writ A No.5185 of 2019 (Malti Devi and another Vs. State of U.P. and others) in which following order was passed on 08.07.2019 :- Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned standing counsel for respondent nos. 1 and 2 and Sri Pranesh Dutt Tripathi, holding brief of Sri Harsh Vardhan Gupta, learned counsel for respondent no. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that on the identical matter, Court has passed following order; "Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent nos. 1, 2 and 5 and Sri Harsh Vardhan Gupta, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 3 and 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has assailed the order dated 14.08.2018 passed by the Basic Shiksha Adhikai, Kaushambi by which appointment of petitioners was cancelled on the ground that since the marksheet of Teacher Eligibility Test, 2011 could not be verified and same is not available on the website, therefore, treating marksheet of Teacher Eligibility Test, 2011 as forged, appointment of the petitioners have been cancelled, which is not sustainable. Mr. Harsh Vardhan Gupta, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 3 and 4 could not dispute this fact that order impugned has only been passed on the ground that marksheet of Teacher Eligibility Test, 2011 could not be verified. Matter requires consideration. All the respondents are granted four weeks time to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed within one week thereafter. List this case on 13th August, 2019. Until further order of this Court, the effect and operation of the order dated 14.08.2018 passed by the Basic Shiksha Adhikai, Kaushambi shall remain stayed." Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are also entitled for the same interim relief. Learned standing counsel for respondent nos. 1 and 2 as well as Sri Pranesh Dutt Tripathi, holding brief of Sri Harsh Vardhan Gupta, learned counsel for respondent no. 3 has not disputed this fact. Under such facts and circumstances, connect this petition along with Writ A No. 9461 of 2019 and list on the date fixed in the connected matter. In the meantime, learned counsel for the parties may exchange their pleadings. Until further order of this Court, the effect and operation of the order dated 14.08.2018 passed by the District Basic Shiksha Adhikai, Kaushambi shall remain stayed. 4. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that in spite of the interim order granted in favour of the petitioner and the petitioner is working regularly but the respondents are not making payment of the salary to the petitioner. 5. On the other hand, it is argued by Sri Harsh Vardhan Gupta, learned counsel for respondent No.2/District Basic Education Officer, Kaushambi that the interim order granted in favour of the petitioner in Writ A No.5185 of 2019 is based on the interim order granted in Writ A No.9461 of 2019 filed by Amar Singh and another. In the said writ petition, the interim order dated 05.07.2019 granted in favour of the Amar Singh and the aforesaid interim order was vacated by this Court vide order dated 27.08.2021. The order reads as follows:- In the counter affidavit filed by the State on behalf of respondents No. 3 & 4, it is clearly stated that the T.E.T. certificate being relied upon by the petitioners is a forged and manufactured document. In view thereof, interim order dated 5.7.2019 is vacated. List this case on 16 September 2021. In the meantime, rejoinder affidavit to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondents no. 3 & 4, may be filed. The fifth respondent shall file affidavit clearly stating that whether the certificates annexed along with the writ petition are genuine. 6. It is further argued that in Writ A No.5185 of 2019, Stay Vacation Application has already been filed. It is further argued that since the interim order was not complied, the petitioner has initiated contempt proceedings in which order has been passed to list the aforesaid contempt petition after disposal of the stay vacation order. It is argued that since the stay vacation application is already pending consideration in Writ A No.5185 of 2019, no order is required to be passed in the present petition. It is further argued that since the grievance raised in present writ petition has been raised by the petitioner in Writ A No.5185 of 2019, the present petition is the second petition for the same cause of action and is not maintainable. 7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 8. From perusal of the record, it transpires that interim order granted in Writ A No.9461 of 2019 has already been vacated by this Court on 27.08.2021 and the stay vacation application has already been filed in Writ A No.5185 of 2019 which is still pending. In case, the order dated 08.07.2019 was not complied with, the petitioner is free to initiate contempt proceedings against the concerned authorities, the petition is not maintainable. 9. In this view of the matter, the present petition is not maintainable and the same is hereby dismissed. Order Date :- 27.2.2025 saqlain Digitally signed by :- SYED MOHAMMAD SAQLAIN HAIDER High Court of Judicature at Allahabad