Lalita v. Counsel for
Case Details
Srivastava Court No. - 52 HON'BLE MRS. MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J. Learned Standing Counsel for the State has passed on instructions in the Court today, which are taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents. The present petition has been filed with the prayer to quash the impugned order dated 02.06.2025 passed by respondent no.3 vide which the renewal of the service contract of the petitioner as teacher in Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidyalaya, Sururpur, Meerut in English subject has been denied and a further prayer to direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to continue in service and ensure payment of salary to the petitioner as and when it becomes due. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as a full-time teacher in Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidyalaya, Sururpur, Meerut in English subject on 4.4.2011. The aforesaid appointment has been made in pursuance of the government policy which was started by the Government of India in the year 2004-2005. Her services were renewed from time to time as per the conditions mentioned in the Government Order dated
11.12.2020. The petitioner's service was satisfactory, there being no complaint against her. Surprisingly on 1.5.2025, notices were issued to six teachers including the petitioner making false and vague allegations against her regarding 2 WRIA No. 11380 of 2025 educational level of the students being low. The aforesaid notice was followed by another notice dated 2.5.2025, wherein it has been mentioned that three students were unable to read English Textbook properly and their English notebook was not completely checked. To the aforesaid notice, the petitioner submitted a reply, without considering which the order impugned has been passed, therefore, the present petition has been filed. On 19.8.2025, the following order was passed :- "1. Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to implead Director General School Education & State Project Director, Lucknow as respondent no. 5 in the array of parties during the course of the day.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed as full time teacher in Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidyalaya, Sururpur, Meerut for teaching English on 04.04.2011 and the appointment was done in accordance with relevant Government Order, the latest Government Order of 11.12.2020 is annexed as Annexure No. 3 to the instant petition. He further submits that by the impugned order the renewal of petitioner's contract service has been rejected on vague and ambiguous grounds without giving any notice and opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as required under Clause 8 of the relevant Government Order which speaks about giving of notice and consideration of the reply of the petitioner prior to rejection of renewal. In the aforesaid Government order it has also been mentioned that one month's notice is to be given prior to the rejection of the said renewal.
3. Mr. A.K. Nagvanshi, learned A.C.S.C. for the State-respondents and Mr. Shivendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for respondent no. 5 are granted two weeks' time to obtain instructions in the matter.
4. Put up this case on 05.09.2025, as fresh." Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order impugned is non- speaking order, as it has been simply said that the reply of the petitioner was found unsatisfactory, therefore, it is in violation of principles of natural justice. He further submits that in case the work of the teachers in 3 WRIA No. 11380 of 2025 the institution is not found to be satisfactory, if being assessed by the relevant authorities, as mentioned in the Government Order, a proper notice and opportunity of hearing has to be given to the person concerned and a proposal for taking final decision has to be placed before the District Magistrate concerned. Another condition mentioned in the said Government Order for renewal of the contract of services of the teachers is that in case their services are not found satisfactory, a months notice has to be given before refusing renewal. The order impugned has been passed in violation of the aforesaid guidelines as mentioned in the Government Order. Thus, the impugned order is unsustainable and bad in the eyes of law. Learned Standing Counsel for the State on the basis of instructions submits that a notice has already been given to the petitioner on 8.5.2025, however, could not dispute the fact that there is no whisper of any such notice in the order impugned. Heard learned counsels for the parties. The perusal of the instructions goes to show that by submitting the notice as been given to the petitioner on 8.5.2025, the authorities are trying to fill the gap in the order impugned, which is not permitted in view of settled position of law. The Court finds that the impugned order has been passed in violation of principles of natural justice and is against the terms and conditions as mentioned in the Government Order dated 11.12.2020. Accordingly, the orders impugned dated 2.6.2025 is set aside. The matter is remanded back to respondent no.3-District Basic Education Officer, District- Meerut for decision afresh, on merits, strictly in accordance with law, by means of reasoned and speaking order, after giving fresh notice and proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as considering the reply of the petitioner, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment. It is also directed that the petitioner may be permitted to join as full-time teacher in Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidyalaya, Sururpur, Meerut to teach 4 WRIA No. 11380 of 2025 English subject. The present writ petition is allowed subject to the observations made above. September 8, 2025 Kalp Nath Singh (Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.) KALP NATH SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Srivastava Court No. - 52 HON'BLE MRS. MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J. Learned Standing Counsel for the State has passed on instructions in the Court today, which are taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents. The present petition has been filed with the prayer to quash the impugned order dated 02.06.2025 passed by respondent no.3 vide which the renewal of the service contract of the petitioner as teacher in Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidyalaya, Sururpur, Meerut in English subject has been denied and a further prayer to direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to continue in service and ensure payment of salary to the petitioner as and when it becomes due. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as a full-time teacher in Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidyalaya, Sururpur, Meerut in English subject on 4.4.2011. The aforesaid appointment has been made in pursuance of the government policy which was started by the Government of India in the year 2004-2005. Her services were renewed from time to time as per the conditions mentioned in the Government Order dated
11.12.2020. The petitioner's service was satisfactory, there being no complaint against her. Surprisingly on 1.5.2025, notices were issued to six teachers including the petitioner making false and vague allegations against her regarding 2 WRIA No. 11380 of 2025 educational level of the students being low. The aforesaid notice was followed by another notice dated 2.5.2025, wherein it has been mentioned that three students were unable to read English Textbook properly and their English notebook was not completely checked. To the aforesaid notice, the petitioner submitted a reply, without considering which the order impugned has been passed, therefore, the present petition has been filed. On 19.8.2025, the following order was passed :- "1. Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to implead Director General School Education & State Project Director, Lucknow as respondent no. 5 in the array of parties during the course of the day.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed as full time teacher in Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidyalaya, Sururpur, Meerut for teaching English on 04.04.2011 and the appointment was done in accordance with relevant Government Order, the latest Government Order of 11.12.2020 is annexed as Annexure No. 3 to the instant petition. He further submits that by the impugned order the renewal of petitioner's contract service has been rejected on vague and ambiguous grounds without giving any notice and opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as required under Clause 8 of the relevant Government Order which speaks about giving of notice and consideration of the reply of the petitioner prior to rejection of renewal. In the aforesaid Government order it has also been mentioned that one month's notice is to be given prior to the rejection of the said renewal.
3. Mr. A.K. Nagvanshi, learned A.C.S.C. for the State-respondents and Mr. Shivendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for respondent no. 5 are granted two weeks' time to obtain instructions in the matter.
4. Put up this case on 05.09.2025, as fresh." Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order impugned is non- speaking order, as it has been simply said that the reply of the petitioner was found unsatisfactory, therefore, it is in violation of principles of natural justice. He further submits that in case the work of the teachers in 3 WRIA No. 11380 of 2025 the institution is not found to be satisfactory, if being assessed by the relevant authorities, as mentioned in the Government Order, a proper notice and opportunity of hearing has to be given to the person concerned and a proposal for taking final decision has to be placed before the District Magistrate concerned. Another condition mentioned in the said Government Order for renewal of the contract of services of the teachers is that in case their services are not found satisfactory, a months notice has to be given before refusing renewal. The order impugned has been passed in violation of the aforesaid guidelines as mentioned in the Government Order. Thus, the impugned order is unsustainable and bad in the eyes of law. Learned Standing Counsel for the State on the basis of instructions submits that a notice has already been given to the petitioner on 8.5.2025, however, could not dispute the fact that there is no whisper of any such notice in the order impugned. Heard learned counsels for the parties. The perusal of the instructions goes to show that by submitting the notice as been given to the petitioner on 8.5.2025, the authorities are trying to fill the gap in the order impugned, which is not permitted in view of settled position of law. The Court finds that the impugned order has been passed in violation of principles of natural justice and is against the terms and conditions as mentioned in the Government Order dated 11.12.2020. Accordingly, the orders impugned dated 2.6.2025 is set aside. The matter is remanded back to respondent no.3-District Basic Education Officer, District- Meerut for decision afresh, on merits, strictly in accordance with law, by means of reasoned and speaking order, after giving fresh notice and proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as considering the reply of the petitioner, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment. It is also directed that the petitioner may be permitted to join as full-time teacher in Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidyalaya, Sururpur, Meerut to teach 4 WRIA No. 11380 of 2025 English subject. The present writ petition is allowed subject to the observations made above. September 8, 2025 Kalp Nath Singh (Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.) KALP NATH SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad