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

2026 Supreme(All) 4

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

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s):Siddharth Khare, Sr. Advocate
For Respondent(s): C.S.C.

Teachers of a derecognized institution do not have a legal right to claim absorption in other schools; recognition cancellation eliminates enforceable employment rights.

Headnote:(A) U.P. Basic Education Act, 1972; U.P. Junior High School (Payment of Salary to Teachers & Other Employees) Act, 1978; U.P. Recognized Basic School (Junior High School) (Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Teachers) Rules, 1978 - Writ petition for quashing order of Director of Education impugning adjustment of staff following cancellation of institution’s recognition due to irregularities. (Paras 4, 24, 42)

(B) Employment Rights - Employees of a derecognized institution do not have a vested right to claim adjustment or absorption in other institutions absent express provision; claims based merely on sympathy or hardship are impermissible. (Paras 42-57)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners, employees of a derecognized school, sought adjustment in other schools after their salaries were withheld since August 2018 due to issues with the school's recognition. They argued for similar treatment as other staff in comparable circumstances. (Paras 11-13, 25)

Findings of Court:
The court found that the petitioners have no enforceable right for adjustment post-cancellation of the school’s recognition, which was primarily due to fraudulent claims regarding the school’s premises. (Paras 42-51)

Issues: Whether staff of a derecognized institution can claim adjustment in other institution post-recognition cancellation; interpretation of employment rights in absence of statutory provision for absorption. (Paras 25, 36, 42)

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that teachers lose all legal rights to employment upon cancellation of recognition, irrespective of sympathies toward their situations; equitable considerations cannot override statutory absence. (Paras 52-54)

Result: Writ petition dismissed.

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

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 Back to top