SUNIL DUTT Vs. STATE OF U P
LAWS(ALL)-2012-2-9
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on
February 09,2012
BHARAT SINGH,UTTAM SINGH,VINOD KUMAR,SUNIL DUTT,RAM KUMAR,ARUN KUMAR MISHRA,RAJESH KUMAR,SANJAY KUMAR,RAM PRAKASH SINGH,SATYA PRAKASH,MADAN PAL SINGH,SANJAY KUMAR SRIVASTAVA,SANTOSH KUMAR SINGH,GOPAL PRASAD,RAM PRAKASH SHARMA,ASHWANI KUMAR VERMA,MOHD. AHMAD,CHANDRA PRATAP SINGH,PRAMOD KUMAR SHUKLA,BAL GOVIND,SWAMI PRASAD MAURYA,HARE RAM,DASHRATH LAL DWIVEDI,AJAY MANGALAM,GIRIJESH SINGH,ASHUTOSH SHUKLA,UMESH CHANDRA CHAURASIYA,SHIV KUMAR SAROJ,ATUL KUMAR TRIPATHI,INDRA DEV VERMA,ARVIND SINGH BUDHYA,SUMAN YADAV,VIRESH BAHADUR SINGH,RAM SULABH YADAV,DESH DIPAK,RAMESH CHANDRA DWIVEDI,ANIL KUMAR DAS,SANJAY KUMAR SHUKLA,SAMAR FIRDAUS,UTTAM KUMAR CHAUDHARY,TULA RAM GIRI,ARUN KUMAR YADAV,JITENDRA KUMAR MISHRA,MUKTI NATH MAURYA,VISHNU KANT SRIVASTAVA,GURU BACHAN,RAMU LAL,NIRDESH KUMAR VERMA,AMBRISH JAUHARI,SURESH PRAKASH SHUKLA,MOHD. ATHAR ANSARI,DINESH KANT PANDEY
Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH,GAJRAJ SINGH,STATE OF UTTAR PRADESHTHROUGH SECRETARY BASIC EDUCATION,STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH THROUGH SECRETARY BASIC EDUCATION,STATE OF U.P. THROUGH SECRETARY BASIC EDUCATION
Respondents
JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) Since facts and legal issues involved in the instant writ petitions are common, the same are being heard together and decided by a common judgment & order. The Writ Petition No. 1178 (SS) of 2011 is taken up as leading case.
(2.) Present writ petition has been filed for quashing of the impugned order dated 10.2.2011(Annexure No. 1), passed by opposite party no. 3, so far as it makes provision for taking over the charge of the post of Block Resource Coordinator by the Ex-officio Block Resource Coordinator i.e. Asst. Basic Education Officer of the concerned block as well as Government Order dated 02.02.2011 (Annexure No.2), so far as it makes provision for posting of District Basic Education Officer as Ex-officio Block Resource Coordinator and further directions have been sought for restraining the opposite parties from interfering in the functioning of the petitioners on the post of B.R.C. Coordinators in any manner.
(3.) Sri H.G.S. Parihar, Sri R.K. Chaudhary and Sri R.C. Tiwari along with other counsel for the petitioners, at the very outset, submitted that they are not challenging the policy decision of the State Government taken vide Government Order dated 02.02.2011 as the policy decision of the State Government does not speak anything about the present working incumbents, who have been appointed for the term of two years after due selection. It is further submitted that the petitioners are basically aggrieved with the Circular dated 10.02.2011, issued by the Project Director, U.P. Education for all Project Council, Lucknow (opposite party no.3) in pursuance to the policy decision of the State Government dated 02.02.2011, who on its own issued directives for replacing the petitioners and other working BRC Coordinators by posting of Assistant Basic Education Officer as Ex-officio BRC Coordinators and also directed for relieving of the BRC Coordinators even before the expiry of their term. In some of the petitions the grievance with respect to non-payment of salary assigned to the post of BRC Coordinators i.e. the pay scale equivalent to the post of Headmaster of Junior High School have also been raised, which has been provided in the Government Order dated 01.09.2001 and as well as in the advertisement dated 12.12.2009 published by the District Basic Education Officer, Bulandshahr in daily Newspaper "Amar Ujala" (Annexure-SA-1 to the supplementary affidavit dated 02.03.2011).;
(2.) Present writ petition has been filed for quashing of the impugned order dated 10.2.2011(Annexure No. 1), passed by opposite party no. 3, so far as it makes provision for taking over the charge of the post of Block Resource Coordinator by the Ex-officio Block Resource Coordinator i.e. Asst. Basic Education Officer of the concerned block as well as Government Order dated 02.02.2011 (Annexure No.2), so far as it makes provision for posting of District Basic Education Officer as Ex-officio Block Resource Coordinator and further directions have been sought for restraining the opposite parties from interfering in the functioning of the petitioners on the post of B.R.C. Coordinators in any manner.
(3.) Sri H.G.S. Parihar, Sri R.K. Chaudhary and Sri R.C. Tiwari along with other counsel for the petitioners, at the very outset, submitted that they are not challenging the policy decision of the State Government taken vide Government Order dated 02.02.2011 as the policy decision of the State Government does not speak anything about the present working incumbents, who have been appointed for the term of two years after due selection. It is further submitted that the petitioners are basically aggrieved with the Circular dated 10.02.2011, issued by the Project Director, U.P. Education for all Project Council, Lucknow (opposite party no.3) in pursuance to the policy decision of the State Government dated 02.02.2011, who on its own issued directives for replacing the petitioners and other working BRC Coordinators by posting of Assistant Basic Education Officer as Ex-officio BRC Coordinators and also directed for relieving of the BRC Coordinators even before the expiry of their term. In some of the petitions the grievance with respect to non-payment of salary assigned to the post of BRC Coordinators i.e. the pay scale equivalent to the post of Headmaster of Junior High School have also been raised, which has been provided in the Government Order dated 01.09.2001 and as well as in the advertisement dated 12.12.2009 published by the District Basic Education Officer, Bulandshahr in daily Newspaper "Amar Ujala" (Annexure-SA-1 to the supplementary affidavit dated 02.03.2011).;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.