BIRENDRA SINGH YADAV Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND ORS.
LAWS(ALL)-2011-4-483
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on April 11,2011

Birendra Singh Yadav Appellant
VERSUS
State of U.P. and Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) THE present appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 23rd February, 2011 passed by the learned Single Judge, whereby the writ petition preferred by the present Appellant has been dismissed on the ground that he is working as Principal in Badri Yadav Uchchattar Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Medanipur, Karanda in Ghazipur and, therefore, he cannot be permitted to work as Principal of the institution namely Shri Shiv Bahal Uchchattar Madhyamik Vidyalaya Sugwaliya Anharipur, Ghazipur.
(2.) VIDE order dated 24th March, 2011 the learned Standing Counsel was directed to produce the record of the District Inspector of Schools, Ghazipur, which resulted in passing of the order dated 15.2.2011. The Court had fixed 31st March, 2011 as the next date. However, on 31st March, 2011 when the matter was taken up, it transpired that instead of producing the record the District Inspector of Schools has sent his comments to the learned Standing Counsel, which comments were perused by the Court. The Court, thereafter, directed the District Inspector of Schools, Ghazipur to be personally present before the Court on 11th April, 2011 along with the record in terms of earlier order dated 24th March, 2011. Today, the District Inspector of Schools, Ghazipur Sri Bhaskar Mishra is personally present in the Court along with the record, which resulted in passing of the order dated 15.2.2011. On a query being made as to what is the material before the District Inspector of Schools to establish that the Appellant was also working as the Principal of Badri Yadav Uchchattar Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Medanipur, Karanda, District Ghazipur, the District Inspector of Schools through learned Standing Counsel pointed out that except for the claim made by the Respondent No. 4 there was nothing on record to establish this fact.
(3.) MERELY , making of a claim by the contesting party would not establish the fact claimed by the said person. It was the duty of the District Inspector of Schools to get it verified from the concerned institution as also from the records maintained by the District Inspector of Schools as both the institutions were under his control. The District Inspector of Schools having not verified the claim made by the contesting Respondent No. 4 was, therefore, not justified in coming to the conclusion that the Appellant was working as Principal of Badri Yadav Uchchattar Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Medanipur, Karanda, District Ghazipur.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.