# Smt. Abha Dwivedi v. State of U.P. & Ors

- **Citation:** (2015) 3 ILRA 1369
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2015-03-31
- **Case number:** Writ- A No. 40235 of 2015
- **Bench:** Mrs. Sunita Agarwal
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/smt-abha-dwivedi-v-state-of-u-p-ors-43321
- **Pages:** 3

## Headnote

U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921Regulation
21
Chapter-III-benefit
of
academic
session-G.
O.-
15.06.2015
clarifying
the
situation-those
teachers
working
beyond
their
age
of
superannuation-on 31.03.2015-not entitled
for further benefits of extension-argument
regarding discrimination with those retiring
prior 31st March 2015 and retiring after
April 15-misconceived-petition dismissed.
Held: Para-13
In view of the above discussion, the
petitioner cannot be allowed to continue till
31st March, 2016 for the reason that she
had attained the age of superannuation
during the Academic Session 2014-15 and
had continued till 30th June, 2015 i.e. end
of that academic session 2014-15.
Case Law discussed:
Special Appeal Defective 492 of 2015

## Text

3 All] Smt. Abha Dwivedi Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
1369
Dismissal order dated 3.5.2010 and the order
dated 10.05.2011 are hereby quashed.
Respondent no.1 is further directed to take
appropriate
decision
on
petitioner's
application seeking voluntary retirement in
the light of discussion made above and in
accordance with law, within three months.
28. So far as question of consequential
relief is concerned, petitioner's continuous
absence from duty without sanction of leave
is admitted. We, therefore, leave it to
competent authority to take appropriate
decision in accordance with Rules; whether
period of absence of petitioner is to be
regularized against leave admissible and
whether petitioner would be entitled to salary
for such period. It would pass an appropriate
reasoned order after it takes decision on
petitioner's application seeking voluntary
retirement but not beyond three months from
the date the decision is taken on the
application for voluntary retirement.
--------
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 27.08.2015
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS. SUNITA AGARWAL, J.
Writ- A No. 40235 of 2015
Smt. Abha Dwivedi
 ...Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. & Ors.
...Respondents
Counsel for the Petitioner:
Sri B.N. Tiwari, Sri Venu Gopal
Counsel for the Respondents:
C.S.C.
U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921Regulation
21
Chapter-III-benefit
of
academic
session-G.
O.-
15.06.2015
clarifying
the
situation-those
teachers
working
beyond
their
age
of
superannuation-on 31.03.2015-not entitled
for further benefits of extension-argument
regarding discrimination with those retiring
prior 31st March 2015 and retiring after
April 15-misconceived-petition dismissed.
Held: Para-13
In view of the above discussion, the
petitioner cannot be allowed to continue till
31st March, 2016 for the reason that she
had attained the age of superannuation
during the Academic Session 2014-15 and
had continued till 30th June, 2015 i.e. end
of that academic session 2014-15.
Case Law discussed:
Special Appeal Defective 492 of 2015
(Delivered by Hon'ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal, J.)
1. Heard Sri Venu Gopal, learned
counsel for the petitioner and learned
Standing Counsel.
2. The petitioner seeks mandamus to
continue till 30th March, 2016 on the basis
of the Government order dated 15.10.2014
which provides for the change of Academic
Session to 1st April to 31st March instead
and in place of 1st July to 30th June.
3. By means of the subsequent
Government order dated 15th June, 2015,
it has been clarified that the change of
academic session to 1st April to 31st
March would not have any effect on
providing session benefit to those teachers
who had retired and were continuing till
30th June 2015 on Session benefit. The
teachers who had continued beyond their
age of superannuation would not be
allowed to continue till the end of
Academic Session 2015-16 i.e. till 31st
March, 2016 in view of the change of
Academic Session vide Government order
dated 9th September, 2014.
1370
 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
4. The submissions is that the
benefit has not been provided to those
teachers who had attained the age of
superannuation till 31st March, 2015 and
the teachers who had retired between 1st
April, 2015 till 30th June, 2015 have been
allowed to continue till 31st March, 2016
in view of the change in the Academic
Session 2015-16, otherwise they would
have retired on 30th June, 2015. This
classification between the same class of
teachers has no reasonable nexus with the
object not to disrupt the teaching of the
students in the midst of the Academic
Session due to retirement of the teachers.
5.
Further submissions is that the
teachers who were continuing on Session
benefit till 30th June, 2015 were actually in
service and their date of retirement is treated
as 30th June, 2015 for all pensionary
benefits. They are even entitled to continue
to hold the position of responsibility such as
the post of officiating Principal by virtue of
being Senior most teacher in the institution
concerned. On the date of coming into
operation of the provision for change of
session i.e. the date of commencement of
Academic Session 2015-16 on 2nd April
2015, these teachers were in service and as
such they are entitled to continue till 31st
March 2016.
6. The challenge to the Government
order dated 15.06.2015 on the above
grounds
by
the
petitioner
is
not
sustainable for two simple reasons:-
7. The first reason is that by means
of the Government order dated 9th
September, 2014, which is applicable for
the Primary/Upper Primary institution run
by Basic Siksha Parishad, the period of
Academic Session from the Session 201516 onwards has been changed and now it
commences on 1st April and would not
end on 31st March.
8. So far as the Academic Session
2015-16 is concerned, admittedly, the
same had commenced from 1st April,
2015 and would end on 31st March, 2016.
The provision to continue till the end of
the Academic Session is with the object to
continue the teaching work uninterrupted
for the benefit of the students.
9. The teachers who had attained the
age of superannuation on or before 1st
April, 2015 during the Academic Session
2014-15 have been allowed to continue
till the end of that academic session which
had ended on 30th June, 2015.
10. By means of the Government order
dated 9th September, 2014, there was no
change in the Academic Session 2014-15
which was ensuing till 30th June, 2015. The
teachers who had retired during the Academic
Session 2014-15 cannot be allowed to
continue till the end of next Academic Session
2015-16 which is 31st March 2016. The
extension in service is only till the end of
Academic Session in which the teacher had
attained the age of superannuation.
11. The second reason is that the
continuance of the teachers till 30th June,
2015 is an extension in service till the
date of effective retirement. The original
date of retirement is not extended.
12. Once they had duly availed the
benefit of extension, no further benefit
can be provided to them. A Division
Bench of this Court in Bhajan Lal
Diwakar Vs. Bani Singh Thakurela and 4
others
reported
in
Special
Appeal
Defective No. 492 of 2015 considering
the effect of amendment in Regulation 21
3 All] Smt. Suman & Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
1371
as contained in Chapter III of the
Regulations framed under the U.P.
Intermediate Education Act, 1921 has
held that the benefit of change of
academic session cannot be provided to
those teachers who were continuing on
session
benefit
on
the
date
of
commencement of the Academic session
2015-16.
13. In view of the above discussion,
the petitioner cannot be allowed to
continue till 31st March, 2016 for the
reason that she had attained the age of
superannuation
during the Academic
Session 2014-15 and had continued till
30th June, 2015 i.e. end of that academic
session 2014-15.
14. There is no merits in the writ
petition. The writ petition is dismissed. .
--------
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 28.08.2015
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE KRISHNA MURARI, J.
THE HON'BLE AMAR SINGH CHAUHAN, J.
Writ-C No. 41005 of 2009
Smt. Suman & Ors.
 ...Petitioners
Versus
State of U.P. & Ors.
...Respondents
Counsel for the Petitioners:
Sri Rajeev Kumar Pandey, Sri N.K.
Dwivedi
Counsel for the Respondents:
C.S.C., Sri Sanjay Singh Jatav, Sri Shiv
Nath Singh, Sri Vivek Varma
Constitution of India, Art.-226-Demand
notice-without
adjusting
amounts
already
paid-in
spite
of
specific
direction-no
statement
of
accounts
placed-petitioner
belongs
to
economically weaker section of societyin absence of specific denial in counter
affidavit-development
authority
to
execute sale deed in favor of petitioner.
Held: Para-12
In
the
facts
and
circumstances,
respondent authority since has failed to
bring
on
record
the
details
of
outstanding
balance
against
the
petitioners though specifically required
to do so vide order dated 11.8.2009, we
are left with no option but to believe the
averments made by the petitioners in the
writ petition that all outstanding dues
against them was deposited, the receipts
whereof are on the record of the case as
annexures 10 & 12 to the writ petition.
(Delivered by Hon'ble Krishna Murari, J.)
1.
The petitioners, 19 in numbers ,
have approached this Court seeking a writ
of Certiorari to quash the notices dated
09.04.2009, 25.04.2009, 26.05.2009 and
25.06.2009 (Annexure-14 to the writ
petition) for payment of outstanding dues
of EWS Flats allotted to them by the
respondent no. 2 Kanpur Development
Authority (hereinafter referred to as the
'Development Authority'). The notices
further specified that the calculation
mentioned has been made on the basis of
One time Settlement (OTS) and if the
petitioners intended to take advantage of
the said scheme they may deposit Rs.200/-
with the prescribed bank and produce the
receipt, failing which this benefit of the
scheme will not be extended. Further a
writ of mandamus has been claimed
commanding the respondents to execute
sale deed in favour of the petitioners as all
the petitioners have deposited entire
amount and interest furnished by the
respondents
vide
statement
of
account/letter dated 13.12.2007.