Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 98318 (ALL)

SMT GEETA SHARMA v. State of UP AND 4 OTHERS

WRIA/14652/2024 · 2025-02-16

Saurabh Shyam Shamshery

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:22107 Court No. - 10 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14652 of 2024 Petitioner :- Smt Geeta Sharma Respondent :- State Of Up And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Krishna Mohan Asthana Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J. 1. Heard Sri K.M. Asthana, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri Shailendra Singh, learned Standing Counsel for State-Respondents. 2. It is not under much dispute that petitioner has completed her M.Lib. Degree in the year 2006-07 by a Distance Education Course. The said degree is recorded in her service book as well as on basis of said qualification petitioner’s seniority was also fixed. Now an objection is raised at the stage of payment of Academic Grade Pay of Rs. 6000/- that said M.Lib. Degree was passed by Distance Education Course without “no objection”. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that though there is no specific order of “no objection” from State-Respondents, however, above referred circumstances can be considered as an implied “no objection”. He further submits that since it was a Distance Course, no specific “no objection” is required. 4. Learned Standing Counsel refers some paragraphs of the instructions communicated to Chief Standing Counsel. The Court is amazed that how a copy of instruction, i.e., a privileged document between client and advocate, is placed on record by way of personal affidavit of Director, Directorate of Technical Education U.P. at Kanpur and for that he is put on caution and Secretary, Department of Technical Education, U.P., Lucknow may look into the matter. 5. In aforesaid circumstances, this Court is of the view that the issue, “whether an information is sufficient for the purpose that petitioner has undertaken a Distance Education Course to complete her M.Lib. Degree and no specific “no objection” is required” was not considered and even in personal affidavit also the said issue was not considered. 6. In view of above, this writ petition is disposed of with observation that concerned respondent will pass a reasoned and specific order on above referred issue, taking note of above referred facts. 7. So far as relief no. (ii) is concerned, which is quoted hereinafter, it is observed that if there is no legal impediment, the same may be allowed to petitioner within a short period and in case there is any legal impediment, the same be communicated to petitioner: “ii. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction of suitable nature commanding the respondents to sanction one additional increment to the petitioner for achievement in sports and for payment of her regular monthly salary accordingly upon such sanction and fixation within a period to be specified by this Hon’ble Court.” Order Date :- 17.2.2025 AK Digitally signed by :- AWADESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- AWADESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad