एक ही परिसर में अवस्थिति पर स्पष्टता न होने के चलते विद्यालय के संविलयन हेतु बीएसए द्वारा जारी आदेश पर मा0 उच्च न्यायालय ने लगाई रोक, देखें

● _याची के विद्यालय का 01 जुलाई 2020 को हुआ संविलयन।_

● _एक ही परिसर में विद्यालय की अवस्थिति पर याची ने जताई थी बीएसए के समक्ष आपत्ति।_

● _याची की आपत्ति पर बीएसए ने 08 जुलाई 2020 को गठित की थी समिति।_

● _समिति द्वारा कोई निर्णय न लिए जाने के चलते मा0 उच्च न्यायालय ने *उस विद्यालय* के संविलयन पर लगाई रोक।_

● _बीएसए द्वारा गठित समिति के परिसर में होने न होने पर निर्णय लेने तक जारी रहेगी संविलयन पर रोक_

संविलियन से मुक्ति के लिए आदेश..

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT

ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH

?In Chamber

Case :- MISC. SINGLE No. - 14902 of 2020

Petitioner :- Sushil Kumar Mishra

Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Basic Education & Ors.

Counsel for Petitioner :- Pramod Kumar Singh

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pradeep S. Bisen

Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

1. Heard Sri Pramod Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State respondents thorough video conferencing in view of COVID-19 pandemic.

2. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that by means Government Order dated 11th May, 2020, it was provided that Primary School and Junior High School, running within the same premises, shall be amalgamated.

3. Perusal of report submitted by the concerned authority indicates that in Institution of the petitioner, both Primary School and Junior High School are running in the same premises and therefore, the impugned order dated 01.07.2020, was passed wherein at Serial No. 18, this fact has been indicated.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he has given various representations, and the Basic Education Officer by order dated 08.07.2020 (Annexure - 6 to the writ petition) referred the matter to the Committee for determination as to whether the Primary and Junior High Schools are situated in the same premises.

5. Contention of the petitioner is that till date report of the Committee constituted for the purpose, has not been submitted. Counsel for the petitioner has also indicated that this Court has given adequate opportunity to the learned counsel appearing for Basic Education Officer to seek instructions in this regard but till date no instructions have been submitted before the Court.

6. Today also learned counsel for the Basic Education Officer is not present and therefore no instructions are available.

7. In the light of above, the order dated 01.07.2020, contained as Annexure-1, with respect to the petitioner whose name appears at serial no. 18, shall remain stayed till the next date of listing.

8. It is clarified that the interim order shall be in existence only till such time as the report of the Committee is not submitted. In case such a report of the Committee duly considers the case of the petitioner and comes to a conclusion that there is no infirmity with the order dated 01.07.2020, report shall be immediately submitted to this Court.

9. Learned Standing Counsel as well as learned counsel appearing for the Basic Education Officer shall file counter affidavit within two weeks.

10. List this case on 13.10.2020.

Order Date :- 23.9.2020

A. Verma

(Alok Mathur, J.)