SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2003 Supreme(All) 122

ANJANI KUMAR
SAROJANI PANDEY – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U. P. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
ANURAG PATHAK

ANJANI KUMAR, J.

( 1 ) HEARD learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

( 2 ) THIS Court by the order dated 7th December, 2002 granted one months and no more further time to the learned Standing Counsel to file counter-affidavit but no counter-affidavit has been filed till date.

( 3 ) LEARNED Standing Counsel firstly prayed for further time to file counter-affidavit but in view of the aforesaid, the same cannot be granted.

( 4 ) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the impugned order relies upon the government Order dated 28th October, 1998, whereby it has been ruled that the examinations of prathama and Madhyama conducted by the Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Prayag, Allahabad are not equivalent to High School and Intermediate Examination conducted by the Board of High School and Intermediate Education, Uttar Pradesh, Allahabad. Learned Counsel has further submitted that the authorities have not taken into consideration the documents Annexures 4 and 4-A to the writ petition.

( 5 ) ANNEXURE 4 is a Government Order dated August 22, 1998 issued by the Joint Secretary, uttar Pradesh Government, addressed to the Director of Education




Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top