UPTET / Allahabad Highcourt : Rules/ Instruction on 12th June 2012

UPTET / Allahabad Highcourt : Rules/ Instruction on 12th June 2012 

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH

Court No. - 26

Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 4454 of 2012

Petitioner :- Km. Pankshi Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Through Secy. Basic Edu. Lko. & Ors.
Petitioner Counsel :- Anurag Srivastava
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,Ghaus Beg

Hon'ble Ajai Lamba,J.
1. This petition prays for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing impugned order dated 12.6.2012, Annexure-3, so far it would adversely affect the petitioner. The petition further prays for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to take any further action in pursuance to the impugned order, Annexure-3, issued by the Secretary, Basic Education Board to all the District Basic Education Officers of the State.
2. Learned counsel for the respondent-State has pointed out that order Annexure-2 is only a show-cause notice given to the petitioner in view of provisions contained in the U.P. Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Rules, 2011.  Although the petitioner was given appointment on compassionate grounds as Assistant Teacher, however, she was not eligible under the said Rules, having not completed Teachers Eligibility Test (for short 'T.E.T.').
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to dispute the fact that the petitioner had not obtained training.  Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, states that the  petitioner did not misrepresent any fact and did not play any fraud on the respondents at the time of applying for the appointment on compassionate grounds.  In such circumstances, the show-cause notice dated 09.7.2012 (Annexure-2) is illegal.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ghaus Beg, learned counsel appearing for respondent nos.4 to 6.
5. No legal infirmity can be traced in instructions dated 12.6.2012 in view of the fact that the instructions have been issued in terms of U.P. Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Rules, 2011.  The rules have not been challenged.
6. The petition in that regard is hereby dismissed.
7. In regard to challenge to Annexure-2, this court is of the opinion that the case is premature insomuch as Annexure-2 is only a show-cause notice issued to the petitioner.  The petition does not indicate that any final order has been passed. The petitioner has been given an opportunity of hearing to which she has already responded.
8. In view of the above, the petition is dismissed as premature, with liberty to raise all the issues raised in this petition.
Order Date :- 27.8.2012/A.Nigam

Source : http://elegalix.allahabadhighcourt.in/elegalix/WebShowJudgment.do?judgmentID=2048607