30 जून को शिक्षकों के रिटायर होने की स्थिति को देखते हुए इलाहाबाद हाईकोर्ट द्वारा बेसिक और माध्यमिक सचिव को 30 जून तक सत्र लाभ के विषय में निर्णय करने का दिया आदेश : शासनादेश की प्रति भी यहीं देखें

Court No. - 33

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 33990 of 2015
Petitioner :- Shrutilesh Kumari
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- G.S. Maurya

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Vikram Bahadur Singh

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

Learned counsel for both the parties agreed that the present controversy is covered by the order dated 12.05.2015 passed by this Court in Writ Petition (A) No.27142 of 2015 (Mithilesh Kumar Pandey vs.State of U.P. and others), which is quoted as under:
This copy of the court order you are reading on www.basicshikshanews.com .
"Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State-respondent no.1,2 and 3 and Sri Shrawan Kumar Pandey, learned counsel appearing for respondents no.4 and 5.

The petitioner claims to be Head Master in an Institution run and maintained by the Basic Education Board. His date of retirement is 30.6.2015. It is submitted that by Government Order dated 22.1.2015 the academic session of the School have been been changed and now it is from Ist of April of the current year to 31st March next year and, therefore, it is prayed that he may be given session benefit and may be allowed to continue till 31st March, 2016.

The writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondent no.1 to consider the claim of the petitioner in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders within a period of three months from the date a certified copy of this order is presented before it"

Accordingly, the present petition is also being disposed of finally.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further pointed out that large number of similarly situated persons have filed petitions raising similar grievance. Learned Standing Counsel has admitted this position.

However, it is further observed that while deciding claim of the petitioner , the Principal Secretary, Secondary Education/ Principal Secretary, Basic Education (who so ever is the concerned authority in the present case) shall take into account the order dated 20.05.2015 passed by this Court in writ petition Service Single No.2557 of 2015 (Jamuna Prasad Verma & another others vs. State of U.P. & 6 others).

It was pointed out that G.O. 25.05.2015 (Secondary Education) and G.O. dated 20.12.2014 (Basic Eduction) are also under challenge. The concerned authority shall also take into account this fact.

In such view of the matter, in case no orders are passed on urgent basis, the petitioner and other similarly situated persons would stand retire on 30th June, 2015, therefore, it would be appropriate that the matter be considered and decided by the above-noted authority concerned before 30th June, 2015.

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed of.

Order Date :- 4.6.2015
Pr/