SMT. GUNJAN MANI TRIPATHIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

                       WRIT - A No. - 3203 of 2026

Smt. Gunjan Mani Tripathi
                                                               .....Petitioner(s)
                                   Versus
State Of U.P. And 4 Others
                                                            .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)        : Gaurav Tiwari
Counsel for Respondent(s)        : Ashish Kumar (Nagvanshi),            C.S.C.,
                                   Nagendra Pratap Singh

Court No. - 52
             HON'BLE MRS. MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J.

The petitioner has preferred the instant writ petition challenging an order
dated 18.02.2026 passed by the District Basic Education Officer, Deoria -
respondent no. 3, whereby respondent no. 5 has been directed to take charge
as officiating Headmaster of Composite Vidyalaya, Kathhinahiya, Deoria, as
well as the consequential order dated 19.02.2026 passed by the Block
Education Officer, Gaura Barhaj, Deoria directing the petitioner to hand over
the charge to respondent no. 5.

Placing the brief facts of the case, learned counsel for the petitioner submits
that respondent no. 5, admittedly being senior to the petitioner, was directed
to take charge as officiating Headmaster by order of the Block Education
Officer dated 27.12.2019. Pursuant to which, the respondent no. 5 gave an
affidavit dated 28.12.2019, appreciating the petitioner who was working as
In-charge Headmaster pursuant to the order dated 20.11.2019 passed by
Block Education Officer and mentioning therein that in case she is offered
the post of Headmaster after being promoted at some other place, she will
definitely join the post. Prior to the said affidavit, the respondent no. 5 had
moved an application dated 24.12.2018 before the District Basic Education
Officer mentioning that due to some personal difficulty, she is not in a
position to take charge as Officiating Headmaster.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been
working as officiating Headmaster after December, 2018. However, by the
impugned order dated 18.02.2026, the District Basic Education Officer has
directed for handing over the charge of officiating Headmaster to respondent
                                                                                              WRIA No. 3203 of 2026
                                                                     2


                                    no. 5 without noticing the fact that respondent no. 5 has already relinquished
                                    her right to the post of officiating Headmaster in the institution. Therefore,
                                    the order impugned is arbitrary and bad in the eyes of law.

                                    Mr. Ashish Kumar Nagvanshi, learned counsel for the respondent BSA and
                                    and Mr. Nagendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel appearing for respondent
                                    no. 5, submit that respondent no. 5 had not waived off her claim to the post
                                    of officiating Headmaster, as is evident from the letter dated 24.12.2018. She
                                    had only stated that due to some personal difficulty, she was not in a position
                                    to officiate as Headmaster. The affidavit dated 28.12.2019 also does not
                                    speak of giving away her right to officiate as Headmaster of the institution.
                                    Admittedly, the petitioner is junior to respondent no. 5. In these
                                    circumstances, there is no illegality in the order impugned and no
                                    interference is required by this Court.

                                    Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and perusal
                                    of record, this Court does not find any good ground to interfere in the
                                    present matter. The writ petition lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed.

                                    The District Basic Education Officer is directed to permit respondent no. 5
                                    to take charge as officiating Headmaster of the institution and in case the
                                    petitioner creates any difficulty or places any hurdle in the aforesaid process,
                                    appropriate action may be taken against her in accordance with law.

                                    No order as to costs.

                                    May 5, 2026
                                    DS
                                                                                 (Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.)




Digitally signed by :-
DIGAMBER SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad