# Satya Dev Yadav v. State of U.P. & Ors - **Citation:** (2020) 1 ILRA 550 - **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad - **Decided:** 2020-01-29 - **Case number:** Special Appeal No. 53 of 2020 - **Bench:** Biswanath Somadder, Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava - **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/satya-dev-yadav-v-state-of-u-p-ors-45690 - **Pages:** 2 ## Headnote C.S.C., Sri R.A. Akhtar, Sri V.B. Mishra A. National Council for Teacher's Education Act, 1993 - Regulations of 2005 - special appeal-against judgment and order dated 20.05.2011-grant of recognition denied-on the ground of violation of Regulation 7 (12) - no illegality or legal infirmity committed by respondent-while granting conditional recognition-unconditional recognitionpre-requisite-for admitting students- ## Text 550 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES under the Rules, strictly in accordance with law bearing in mind what has been said in this judgment, within a period of one month positively from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 12. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the Superintendent of Police, Deoria by the office within a week. ---------- (2020)1ILR 550 APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL SIDE DATED: ALLAHABAD 29.01.2020 BEFORE THE HON'BLE BISWANATH SOMADDER, J. THE HON'BLE DR. YOGENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J. Special Appeal No. 53 of 2020 Satya Dev Yadav ...Appellant Versus State of U.P. & Ors. ...Respondents Counsel for the Appellant: Sri Om Prakash Rai Counsel for the Respondents: Sri Ankit Gaur (Standing Counsel), Sri C.B. Tripathi (Standing Counsel) A. U.P Basic Education Staff Rules, 1973Rule-5-Challenging-impugned Judgment & order-on the ground of-availability of statutory alternative remedy-of Appealagainst the punishment-stoppage of two increments-no such remedy availabledirected to file representation-before the appropriate authority-order stands modified. B. Held, we are of the view that appellant is at liberty to make a representation before the appropriate authority instead of preferring a statutory appeal, as held by the Learned Single Judge. The impugned order and judgment stand modified accordingly. Special Appeal disposed of. (E-8) (Delivered by Hon'ble Biswanath Somadder, J. & Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava, J.) 1. The instant Special Appeal arises in respect of a judgment and order dated 19th December, 2019, passed by a learned Single Judge in Writ-A No. 20402 of 2019 (Satya Deo Yadav versus State of U.P. and 4 others). By the impugned judgement and order, the learned Single Judge was pleased to relegate the writ petitioner before a statutory authority upon taking into consideration the stand taken by the learned standing counsel for the State of Uttar Pradesh to the effect that there is a statutory alternative remedy of appeal under Rule 5 of the Uttar Pradesh Basic Education Staff Rules, 1973, against the order which was impugned before the writ Court. 2. The appellant before us is the writ petitioner. 3. According to the learned advocate for the writ petitioner, the provisions of Rule 5 of the 1973 Rules do not allow the writ petitioner to prefer a statutory appeal in the facts of the present case since the punishment that has been imposed upon the writ petitioner is stoppage of two increments. At this stage, we must notice Rule 5 of the Uttar Pradesh Basic Education Staff Rules, 1973, which reads as follows :- "5. Appeal. - An appeal shall lie from an order passed by the appointing authority in respect of the posts mentioned 1 All. Satya Dev Yadav Vs. State of U.P. & Ors. 551 in column 1 of the Schedule appended to these rules, imposing upon any officer, teacher or other employee of the Board any of the penalties mentioned below, to the appellate authority mentioned in column 3 of the said Schedule :- (a) reduction to a lower post on time-scale or to a lower stage in a timescale; (b) removal from service of the Board which does not disqualify for future employment; (c) dismissal from the service of the Board, which ordinarily disqualifies from future employment. (2) In case of other penalties against which no appeal is provided in this rule, the punished officer, teacher or other employee of the Board may make a representation against the imposition of any of these penalties to such officer as the Director of Education (Basic) may by general orders from time to time specify in this behalf. (3) The procedure laid down in Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, as applicable to servants of the Uttar Pradesh Government shall, as far as possible, be followed in disciplinary proceedings, appeals and representations under these rules." 4. A plain reading of the aforesaid Rule, particularly, sub-rule (2) clearly indicates that in case of other penalties against which no appeal is provided in Rule 5, the punished officer, teacher or other employee of the Board may make a representation against the imposition of any of such penalties to such officers as the Director of Education (Basic) may, by general orders, from time to time, specify in this behalf. 5. In such circumstances, we are of the view that appellant is at liberty to make a representation before the appropriate authority instead of preferring a statutory appeal, as held by the learned Single Judge. The impugned judgment and order stands modified accordingly. 6. The instant Special Appeal stands disposed of in the manner as indicated above. ---------- (2020)1ILR 551 APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL SIDE DATED: ALLAHABAD 21.11.2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE BALA KRISHNA NARAYANA, J. THE HON'BLE ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J. Special Appeal No. 1430 of 2011 C/M Sri Gauri Shanker Sanskrit Maya Vidyalaya & Anr. ...Appellants Versus State of U.P. & Ors. ...Respondents Counsel for the Appellants: Sri Ashok Khare, Sri Siddharth Khare, Sri Anshul Bhatnagar Counsel for the Respondents: C.S.C., Sri R.A. Akhtar, Sri V.B. Mishra A. National Council for Teacher's Education Act, 1993 - Regulations of 2005 - special appeal-against judgment and order dated 20.05.2011-grant of recognition denied-on the ground of violation of Regulation 7 (12) - no illegality or legal infirmity committed by respondent-while granting conditional recognition-unconditional recognitionpre-requisite-for admitting students-