Allahabad High Court
MOOLCHAND UPADHYAY AND 15 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- MANJU RANI CHAUHAN
Holding
The petitioners are not entitled to relief unless they file fresh individual representations before the respondent authority.
Summary
Sixteen petitioners filed a writ petition seeking a direction to the Secretary of the U.P. Basic Education Board to consider their candidature for the post of Assistant Teacher (Science and Mathematics) advertised on 11 July 2013. They alleged that their grievance regarding selection and appointment had not been decided. The respondent counsel relied on observations of the Apex Court in State of U.P. v. Neeraj Kumar Pandey (SLP (C) No. Nil of 2025) to argue that the petitioners were not entitled to any relief. The High Court, without examining the merits, held that relief could be granted only if the petitioners filed fresh individual representations with the required documents. Accordingly, the Court directed that such representations be filed within three weeks and, if so filed, be decided by the respondent within two months. The writ petition was disposed without any order as to costs.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to a court‑directed consideration of their candidature for the Assistant Teacher post without filing fresh representations.
- Whether the observations in State of U.P. v. Neeraj Kumar Pandey preclude granting relief in the present writ petition.
Subjects
- writ petition
- appointment
- assistant teacher
- selection grievance
- fresh representation
- administrative law
- direction
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 7314 of 2026
Moolchand Upadhyay And 15 Others
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Vikram Bahadur Yadav
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Kushmondeya Shahi
Court No. - 52
HON'BLE MRS. MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J.
The petitioners have preferred the instant petition for a direction upon respondent no.
2 - Secretary, U.P. Basic Education Board, U.P., Prayagraj, to consider their
candidature with respect to their selection and appointment on the post of Assistant
Teacher (Science and Mathematics) in Senior Basic Schools against the advertisement
dated 11.07.2013.
The petitioners, who are 16 in number, have approached respondent no. 2 to look into
their grievance, which has not been decided till date, therefore, a direction may be
issued to the respondent authority to decide the same expeditiously.
Learned counsel for the respondent - BSA, submits that in view of the observations of
the Apex Court made in paragraph nos. 13 and 16 of the judgment passed in the case
of State of U.P. Vs. Neeraj Kumar Pandey and others (Special Leave Petition (C)
No. Nil of 2025 (Diary No. 18516 of 2019), the petitioners are not entitled to any
relief. However, in case they move a fresh representation before the respondent
authority, it will be considered and decided in accordance with law.
Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, however
without entering into the merits of the case, the writ petition is being disposed of with
the direction that in case the petitioners move fresh representations individually before
respondent no. 2 within three weeks from today, along with all the required
documents, same shall be considered and decided by respondent no. 2 expeditiously,
preferably within a period of two months thereafter.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
No order as to costs.
May 14, 2026
DS
(Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
DIGAMBER SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…