Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 43306 (ALL)

SMT. ANITA PASAD v. STATE OF U.P.AND 4 ORS.

WRIA/29015/2013 · 2025-05-22

Saurabh Shyam Shamshery

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:88515 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 29015 of 2013 Petitioner :- Smt. Anita Pasad Respondent :- State Of U.P.And 4 Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Pavan Kishore Counsel for Respondent :- Shivam Yadav Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J. 1. None appeared on behalf of the petitioner. Heard, Sri Shivam Yadav, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. Sri Shivam Yadav, learned counsel for the respondent assist the Court to peruse contents of this writ petition. The petitioner Smt. Anita Pasad was unsuited by the impugned order being not eligible for appointment of Assistant Teacher and a prayer for payment of salary from State Exchequer was rejected. Relevant part of the impugned order is mentioned hereinafter:- " ससशश अनशतत पसतद कक ननयसनक नदनतनक 01.07.1991 कक पतईमरश नवभतग मम सहतयक अधयतनपकत कक पद पर हहई हह। जजलत बकजसक नशकत अजधकतरश, मकरठ कक पततनक अरर/910/ नद० 28.06.1991 दतरत अनसमकदन नकयत गयत हह। इनकक शहनकक यकगयतत इणटर एन०टश०टश० हह। इनकक हतई सकक ल, इणटर एवन पनशकण पमतण पत तरत ननयसनक पत एवन अनसमकदन आदकश मम इनकत नतम अनशतत अननकत हह।" 3. This Court has passed the following interim order on 22.05.2013:- "Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Kamlesh Kumar Jaiswal holding brief of Sri Shivam Yadav for the respondent Basic Education Officer. Learned Standing Counsel has accepted notice for the respondent nos. 1, 2 and 4. The petitioner is also one of the teachers whose services were terminated in a similar fashion by the respondent Director of Education which came to be challenged in a large number of writ petitions. The leading writ petition is being 9223 of 2013 and the other writ petitions are 9228 of 2013 and 13457 of 2013. Connect this writ petition alongwith the said writ petitions. Accordingly, for the reasons given in the orders passed in the two writ petitions referred to herein above coupled with the submissions raised by learned counsel for the petitioner, the operation of the impugned order dated 22.10.2012 and 10.11.2012 shall remain stayed and the petitioner will be allowed to continue on her post. It is further directed that the institution shall not take any steps for appointing any other person against the post in question. Learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 to 4, who are represented before this Court, may file a counter-affidavit within 3 weeks. Issue notice to the respondent No.5 returnable at an early date calling upon the said respondent to file an Affidavit within the said period. List after the expiry of the aforesaid period alongwith Writ Petition Nos. 66745 of 2012 and 8112 of 2013. " 4. In the absence of learned counsel for the petitioner, the Court is not aware whether, she has taken benefit of the interim order or not. According to her, she was aged about 48 years, when present writ petition was filed in the year 2013, therefore, presently she must be about 60 years. 5. On merits, N.T.T. (Nursery Teachers' Training) is not an essential qualification for the post of Assistant Teacher and in this regard Court takes note of a judgment passed in the case of Smt. Mala Yadav and 10 others Vs. State of U.P. and 4 others, Neutral Citation No. 2024:AHC:26366, being against the petitioner that N.T.T is not an eligibility for appointment of Assistant Teacher for Class I to VIII. 6. Even after, above observations, Court takes notes that in case the petitioner has taken benefit of the interim order i.e. still working, it would not be appropriate to unsuited her now, as presently she might be about 60 years. Therefore, even in absence of learned counsel for the petitioner, the writ petition is disposed of in terms of interim order. However, it will be subject to the verification whether or not the petitioner has taken benefit of interim order. In case, she has not taken benefit of the interim order, writ petition shall be considered to be disposed of in the light of Smt. Mala Yadav (Supra). Otherwise, as referred above, writ petition will be considered to be disposed of in terms of the interim order. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. 8. A copy of this order be sent to petitioner on given address. 9. Registrar (Compliance) to take steps. Order Date :- 23.5.2025 Imtiyaz Digitally signed by :- IMTIYAZ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad