HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 3203 of 2026 Court No. - 52 HON'BLE MRS. MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J. The petitioner has preferred the instant writ petition challenging an order dated 18.02.2026 passed by the District Basic Education Officer, Deoria - respondent no. 3, whereby respondent no. 5 has been directed to take charge as officiating Headmaster of Composite Vidyalaya, Kathhinahiya, Deoria, as well as the consequential order dated 19.02.2026 passed by the Block Education Officer, Gaura Barhaj, Deoria directing the petitioner to hand over the charge to respondent no. 5. Placing the brief facts of the case, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent no. 5, admittedly being senior to the petitioner, was directed to take charge as officiating Headmaster by order of the Block Education Officer dated 27.12.2019. Pursuant to which, the respondent no. 5 gave an affidavit dated 28.12.2019, appreciating the petitioner who was working as In-charge Headmaster pursuant to the order dated 20.11.2019 passed by Block Education Officer and mentioning therein that in case she is offered the post of Headmaster after being promoted at some other place, she will definitely join the post. Prior to the said affidavit, the respondent no. 5 had moved an application dated 24.12.2018 before the District Basic Education Officer mentioning that due to some personal difficulty, she is not in a position to take charge as Officiating Headmaster. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been working as officiating Headmaster after December, 2018. However, by the impugned order dated 18.02.2026, the District Basic Education Officer has directed for handing over the charge of officiating Headmaster to respondent Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Gaurav Tiwari Counsel for Respondent(s) : Ashish Kumar (Nagvanshi), C.S.C., Nagendra Pratap Singh Smt. Gunjan Mani Tripathi .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) no. 5 without noticing the fact that respondent no. 5 has already relinquished her right to the post of officiating Headmaster in the institution. Therefore, the order impugned is arbitrary and bad in the eyes of law. Mr. Ashish Kumar Nagvanshi, learned counsel for the respondent BSA and and Mr. Nagendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 5, submit that respondent no. 5 had not waived off her claim to the post of officiating Headmaster, as is evident from the letter dated 24.12.2018. She had only stated that due to some personal difficulty, she was not in a position to officiate as Headmaster. The affidavit dated 28.12.2019 also does not speak of giving away her right to officiate as Headmaster of the institution. Admittedly, the petitioner is junior to respondent no. 5. In these circumstances, there is no illegality in the order impugned and no interference is required by this Court. Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and perusal of record, this Court does not find any good ground to interfere in the present matter. The writ petition lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed. The District Basic Education Officer is directed to permit respondent no. 5 to take charge as officiating Headmaster of the institution and in case the petitioner creates any difficulty or places any hurdle in the aforesaid process, appropriate action may be taken against her in accordance with law. No order as to costs. May 5, 2026 DS WRIA No. 3203 of 2026 2 (Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- DIGAMBER SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad