HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J.
Chandra Prakash Singh and 4 others – Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. and 4 others – Respondents
WRIT - A No. - 11217 of 2025
Decided On : 27-01-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. proceedings are consented to be finalized. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. petitioners seek relief post institution recognition withdrawal. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 3. legal basis for absorption post-recognition cancellation not established. (Para 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52) |
| 4. absorption without statutory provisions cannot confer rights. (Para 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57) |
| 5. writ petition dismissed with directions for clarification. (Para 58 , 59 , 60) |
JUDGMENT
HON'BLE MRS. MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J.
1. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that he does not propose to file rejoinder affidavit. Therefore, with consent of the parties this petition is being decided finally without calling for further affidavits.
2. Heard Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Aditendra Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Anoop Trivedi, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Sri Ashish Kumar Nagvanshi, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.
3. The present writ petition has been filed inter-alia for the following reliefs:-
“(i) a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the orderdated 04.06.2025 passed by the Director of Education (Basic), U.P. Lucknow.
(ii) a writ, order or direction of a suitable nature commanding the respondentto adjust/absorb the petitioners in some other recognized and aided JuniorHigh School of District Gorakhpur with all consequential benefits thereofwithin a period to be specified by this Hon’ble Court.
(iii) a writ, order or direction of a suitable nature commanding the respondent to disburse the regular monthly salary to the petitioner no.1, 3 and 5 and regular monthly pension to petitioner no.2 and 4 regularly, every month.
(iv) a writ, order or direction of a suitable nature commanding the respondent to disburse all arrears of salary from September 2018 to the petitioners within a period to be specified by this Hon’ble Court including the arrears of pension to petitioner no.2 and 4 within a period to be specified by this Hon’ble Court.
(v) a writ, order or direction in the nature of which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case.
(vi) award cost to the humble petitioner throughout of the present writ petition.”
4. Placing the brief facts of the case, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that Kishan Shiksha Prasar Mandal, Gorakhpur, is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, which has established a Junior High School under the name of Baba Surya Narayan Das Laghu Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Sirsia, Bhathat, Gorakhpur, which was also receiving grant-in-aid from the State Government. Accordingly, the aforesaid institution is governed by the provisions of the UP Basic Education Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act, 1972'); the UP Recognized Basic Schools (Junior High Schools) (Recruitment & Conditions of Service of Teachers) Rules, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules, 1978'); the UP Recognized Basic School (Junior High School) (Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Ministerial Staff & Group D Employees) Rules, 1984 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules, 1984'); and the UP Junior High School (Payment of Salary to Teachers &Other Employees) Act, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act, 1978').
5. He further submits that the institution in question was brought into the grant-in-aid list by the Government Order issued on 02.12.2006.
6. The petitioner no.1 was duly selected for the post of Assistant Teacher and was accorded approval by the Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Gorakhpur, by order dated 18.09.2015. Accordingly, the Committee of Management of the institution issued an appointment letter dated 10.10.2015, pursuant to which Petitioner No. 1 joined on 14.10.2015.
7. Petitioner No. 2
State of Odisha and another vs. Anup Kumar Senapati and another
State of Bihar v. Kameshwar Prasad Singh
Teachers of a derecognized institution do not have a legal right to claim absorption in other schools; recognition cancellation eliminates enforceable employment rights.
Recognition and financial aid for educational institutions must align with equitable staff employment and ensure compliance with established legal conditions for staff remuneration.
The court established that teachers engaged in unrecognized classes can be regularized upon the recognition of the school, provided their appointments were bona fide.
Appointments made under inapplicable statutory rules are void and cannot confer enforceable rights; the governing statutes change with institutional upgrades.
The court determined that teachers' non-recognition based on arbitrary cut-off dates was unlawful, emphasizing the need for adherence to prior judicial resolutions affirming their employment status a....
The university has exclusive authority over faculty absorption and regularization based on commission recommendations, and previous government notifications remain valid.
Appointments obtained through forged documents are void ab initio, and failure to comply with verification processes undermines claims to employment despite long service, reaffirming minority institu....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.