Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 81727 (ALL)

SMT. ANKITA PANDEY v. STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

WRIA/10946/2025 · 2025-08-03

Manju Rani Chauhan

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:130826 Court No. - 52 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10946 of 2025 Petitioner :- Smt. Ankita Pandey Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Santosh Kumar Pandey,Saurabh Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Kushmondeya Shahi Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J. 1. Heard Mr. Santosh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Kushmondeya Shahi, learned counsel for respondent-BSA and learned Standing Counsel for the State. 2. The writ petition has been filed with the following prayers:- "(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 14.07.2025 passed by respondent no.2, District Basic Education Officer, Kanpur Nagar. (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent authorities to pass an appropriate order, afresh, after considering the representation dated 09.07.2025 served by the petitioner addressing to respondents, in accordance with law." 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner after being appointed as an Assistant Teacher in the year 2015, was blessed with two children. He further submits that for the third child, as one was born prior to her appointment as an Assistant Teacher, she moved an application for maternity leave, which has been rejected in an arbitrary manner by the impugned order dated 14.07.2025. He further submits that the petitioner is entitled for the maternity leave as the same is permitted in accordance with law for two children. The District Basic Education Officer without considering the fact that one child was born prior to appointment of the petitioner as an Assistant Teacher, has not considered the maternity leave. Therefore, the impugned order is arbitrary and the same is liable to be quashed. 4. Mr. K. Shahi, learned counsel for the respondent-BSA, could not dispute the aforesaid fact. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 14.07.2025 passed by the second respondent is hereby quashed and set aside. The matter is remitted back to the respondent no.2 District Basic Education Officer, Kanpur Nagar, for decision afresh, ignoring the delay if any, on merits, strictly in accordance with law, by means of a reasoned and speaking order, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks from today, if there is no legal impediment. Order Date :- 4.8.2025 Rahul. Digitally signed by :- RAHUL GOSWAMI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad