Allahabad High Court
TEJ PRATAP RAI AND 37 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- MANJU RANI CHAUHAN
Holding
The Court declined to rule on the substantive entitlement and disposed of the writ by ordering the petitioners to make fresh representations before the Basic Education Officer, who must decide the matter expeditiously.
Summary
The petitioners, 38 teachers serving as In‑charge Headmasters, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the State to pay them salary and arrears pursuant to a Government Order dated 16‑07‑2026. They alleged that the order entitled them to such remuneration and that the respondents had failed to comply. The State argued that the petitioners should first make fresh representations before the competent authority, which would then decide the matter in accordance with law. The Court, without expressing a view on the substantive entitlement, dismissed the writ and directed the petitioners to file individual fresh representations before the Basic Education Officer, District Azamgarh, within three weeks, and instructed that the officer decide the applications within two months with a reasoned order. The order emphasized adherence to the Government Order and the provision of a hearing, but left the merits for determination by the administrative authority.
Issues considered
- What entitlement, if any, do the petitioners have to salary and arrears as In‑charge Headmasters under the Government Order dated 16‑07‑2026?
- Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued directing the State to pay the claimed salary and arrears.
- Whether the petitioners must first make fresh representations before the competent authority before judicial intervention.
Subjects
- salary
- arrears
- headmaster
- mandamus
- writ petition
- government order
- fresh representation
- education officer
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 16098 of 2026
Tej Pratap Rai And 37 Others
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 4 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Aishwarya Rai, Arvind Kumar Rai,
Vimal Kumar Rai
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Shashi Prakash Singh
Court No. - 52
HON'BLE MRS. MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel for
the State-respondent, Mr. Shashi Prakash Singh, learned counsel for the
respondent-BSA and perused the record.
The present writ petition has been filed inter-alia for the following
reliefs:-
"i. Issue an order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the respondents
authorities to pay the salary of Headmaster alongwith arrears to the petitioners as they have performing the
duty on the post of Headmaster.
ii. Issue any other writ, order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts
and circumstances of the present case.
iii. To award the cost of the petition to the petitioner."
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners, who are
38 in number, are working as In-charge Headmasters. In view of the
Government Order dated 16.07.2026, (the date of the G.O. has wrongly
been mentioned as 16.07.2025), the petitioners are entitled to salary as
well as arrears of salary. Therefore, a direction may be issued to the
respondent no.4 to decide the same.
Learned counsel for the respondents submits that in case petitioners move
a fresh representations before the competent authority, the same shall be
considered and decided in accordance with law.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case but without
expressing any opinion on the merits of the case set up on behalf of the
WRIA No. 16098 of 2026
2
petitioners, the present writ petition is disposed of by providing that the
petitioners may make fresh representations, individually, ventilating all
their grievances, supported by such documents, as may be advised, before
the respondent no.4; Basic Education Officer, District Azamgarh, within
three weeks from today along with a certified copy of this order. On such
representation being made, respondent no.4 shall make all endeavours to
consider and decide the same, strictly in accordance with law, keeping in
mind the directions issued in the aforesaid Government Order, by means
of a reasoned and speaking order, after giving proper opportunity of
hearing to the parties concerned, as expeditiously as possible, preferably
within a period of two months from the date of production of certified
copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment.
(Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.)
October 1, 2026
Jitendra/-
Digitally signed by :-
JITENDRA KUMAR YADAV
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…