AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
14 paragraphs · 254 wordsThis writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs:-
“i) issue a writ of certiorari quashing P3 and P4.
ii) Issue appropriate directions directing the 2nd respondent Director to reconsider P4 in the light of subsequent Government order i.e. Ext.P10 and to
issue consequential directions to grant approval to the petitioner as LPST w.e.f 01.06.2017 with all consequential benefits including salary.â€
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader as well as the learned counsel for the Corporate Manager.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that, Ext.P4 order of the DPI dated 10.11.2020 was issued without considering the Ext.P9
interim order of this Court and the resultant orders passed by the Government in pursuance to the same.
The learned Government Pleader also submits that the order of the DPI dated 10.11.2020 has been issued without noticing Ext.P9 order, which was
dated 13.10.2020.
In the above view of the matter and in view of the admitted factual position that Ext.P9 and the later developments have not been taken note of
while passing the order dated 10.11.2020 of the DPI set aside.
There will be a direction to the Director of General Education to consider the issue afresh, taking note of Exts. P9 and P10. Orders shall be passed
after hearing the petitioner as well as the manager, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
This writ petition is ordered accordingly.
