HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Court No. - 7
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 8403 of 2016
Petitioner :- Smt. Neeta Upadhyay
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another
Counsel for Petitioner :- Vijay Kumar Singh,Hritudhwaj Pratap Sahi
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Jai Krishna Tiwari
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel,J.
The petitioner is an Assistant Teacher in Primary School. She is working as such in Primary School, Dasana-1, Ghaziabad. She has preferred this writ petition for the following relief:
"i. to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent-District Basic Education Officer Ghaziabad to take a decision on the claim set up by the petitioner by means of various representations in respect of grant of increment to her and pass suitable order in respect thereof so that justice be done."
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that result of petitioner's Special B.T.C. was declared on 05th April, 2004 and she has joined the post on 04th January, 2006. It is stated that even the Assistant Teachers, who are junior to the petitioner, have been granted increment but the petitioner has not been sanctioned the increment.
From the record it transpires that the petitioner has made a representation to the District Basic Education Officer, Ghaziabad on 03rd November, 2015 and similar representation has been made to the Director of Education (Basic), U.P. also, but no decision has been taken thereon as yet.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the first respondent and Sri J.K. Tiwari, learned Advocate, who has put in appearance on behalf of the second respondent.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the ends of justice would be met by issuing a direction upon the second respondent to consider the grievance of the petitioner and pass the appropriate order in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months from the date of communication of this order.
Needless to say that this Court has not expressed its opinion on the merits of the case. The second respondent shall pass the order independently and in accordance with law.
The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. No order as to costs.
Order Date :- 24.2.2016
SKT/-
