Court No. - 39
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11087 of 2019 Petitioner :- Meena Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Grijesh Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pranesh Dutt Tripathi
Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent no. 1 and Sri Pranesh Dutt Tripathi, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2, 3 and 4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was initially appointed as Shiksha Mitra in Primary School Patkhauli, Block Kaptanganj, District Kushinagar and joined her service as Shiksha Mitra on 25.04.2006. The State Government has taken a policy decision to appoint Shiksha Mitras, who were graduate, by providing two years B.T.C. Training Course. The petitioner is having two years of B.T.C. Course and she was appointed as Assistant Teacher in the same school vide order dated 30.4.2015. The adjustment of Shiksha Mitras was challenged before this Court in which the adjustment was cancelled and the matter went upto the Apex Court. The order of the High Court was affirmed and petitioner was repatriated back to her original post of Shiksha Mitra. He next submitted that the petitioner joined her service as Shiksha Mitra on 2.7.2018 and since then she is continuously performing her duties as Shiksha Mitra in the same primary school, but she is not getting honorarium from July, 2018. The petitioner made a representation to Block Education Officer, Kaptanganj on which he has made recommendation for payment of honorarium on 14.3.2019. The petitioner moved another representation dated 10.5.2019 to respondent no. 2 for payment of honorarium from July, 2018, but neither representation of the petitioner has been decided nor honorarium has been paid to the petitioner till date. Lastly he submitted that a suitable direction may be issued to the respondent no. 2 to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner within the stipulated period.
Sri Pranesh Dutt Tripathi, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2, 3 and 4 submitted that the representation of the petitioner shall be considered and decided at the earliest.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this writ petition is disposed of with direction to the respondent no. 2 to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner strictly in accordance with law within two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. The petitioner is given liberty to file a fresh representation alongwith certified copy of this order before the respondent no. 2.
It is made clear that this Court has not adjudicated the case on merit. It is upon the respondent no. 2 to pass order after considering the facts of the case, relevant rule and Government Order occupying the field.
Order Date :- 26.7.2019 Rmk.