The only submission made by the counsel for the petitioner is that the impugned order dated 28.5.2014 has been passed by Respondent no. 1 without affording any opportunity to her., which is averred in paragraph no. 10 of the writ petition.
The learned counsel for respondent no. 3 was asked to seek instructions in the matter. Now he has received the instructions. However, the facts that the impugned order was passed without affording any opportunity to the petitioner has not been disputed in the instructions.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner Sri Indra Raj Singh, Sri Mrigraj Singh, learned counsel for respondent nos. 1 and 2 and learned standing counsel for the State-Respondent.
Keeping the writ petition pending would not serve any purpose. Therefore, with the consent of the parties, the writ petition is disposed of in terms of the the Rules of the Court.
Taking into consideration of the facts, the District Basic Education Officer, Jaunpur (Respondent no. 2) is directed to pass appropriate orders after giving opportunity to the petitioner.
Needless to say that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merit of the case. Respondent no. 2 shall decide the case independently in accordance with law.
With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 1.9.2014 SKS