SANJIVE KUMAR AND 5 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS
WRIA/11879/2025 · 2025-08-19
Manju Rani Chauhan
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 87181 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 87181 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:141992 Court No. - 52 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11879 of 2025 Petitioner :- Sanjive Kumar And 5 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pankaj Kumar Ojha Counsel for Respondent :- Akanksha Sharma,C.S.C. Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
1. Heard Mr. Pankaj Kumar Ojha, learned counsel for the petitioners, Ms. Akanksha Sharma, learned counsel for respondent nos.3 to 5 and learned counsel for the State-respondents.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners who are 6 in numbers have approached this Court by means of the present writ petition with the prayer to direct the respondent authorities to pay their salary of Head master/Head Mistress as they are performing the duties of Head Master/Head Mistress in their respective schools. They have moved representations before the competent authority but nothing has been done till date.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners while referring to a recent
judgment dated 30.04.2025 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in Special Appeal No. 652 of 2024 (Secretary, U.P. Basic Education Board and others vs. Tripurari Dubey and others), Neutral Citation No. 2025:AHC:67382-DB, submits that all the legal impediments for payment of salary to Officiating Headmasters in the pay scale of Head Masters have been removed by aforesaid judgment and he refers to the following paragraph of the judgment:
"20. In view of the discussions and deliberations held above this bunch of special appeal stands disposed of with following observation: (i) we grant
liberty to the concerned District Basic Education Officer to examine and determine the factual issue as to whether the petitioner has experience of five years and has actually been continuing as headmaster of the institution; (ii) if the petitioners have continued for long as headmaster the direction to pay the arrears would only extend up to three years prior to filing of the writ petition; (iii) we also make it open for the District Basic Education Officer to ensure at the district level that only senior assistant teachers are allowed to officiate in the educational institution, as far as, it is possible. This would eliminate possibility of heart burning on account of junior assistant teachers functioning as officiating headmaster; (iv) requisite exercise in this regard shall be undertaken within a period of two months and the amount in term of above determination shall be calculated and released without any further loss of time."
4. Learned counsel appearing for respondents nos.3 to 5 has not disputed the above position of law.
5. In view of above, this writ petition is disposed of in terms of aforesaid judgment passed in Tripurari Dubey (supra).
Order Date :- 20.8.2025 Rahul. Digitally signed by :- RAHUL GOSWAMI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad