Latest news with #ArunBhansali
Time of India
4 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
HC orders status quo on process of govt schools' pairing in Sitapur till Aug 21
Lucknow: A Lucknow bench of Allahabad high court on Thursday directed the UP govt to maintain the status quo on the process of pairing of primary schools in Sitapur district till Aug 21. The court passed the interim order after observing some discrepancies in pairing of the schools in the district. The bench, however, clarified that its interim order neither questions the merit of the schools pairing policy nor its implementation. A bench of Chief Justice Arun Bhansali and Justice Jaspreet Singh passed the interim order on two special appeals filed separately by Master Nitish Kumar and Master Dharm Veer through their guardians. The bench observed: "Till the next date, only in respect of district Sitapur, on account of the fact that certain glaring discrepancies have been noticed by the court which are sought to be explained by the respondents, status quo as it exists today, qua the implementation of the exercise undertaken by the respondents for pairing of schools shall be maintained. " The special appeals were filed against the single judge bench's order of July 7, which had dismissed the writ petitions against the state govt order (dated June 16, 2025) on pairing or merger of primary schools which had poor strength of students. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Top 15 Most Beautiful Women in the World Undo The appellants pleaded that paired schools violate the norm of having a school in the neighborhood under the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, and in violation of Article 21-A of the Constitution of India. In the course of hearing, the bench found that the single judge had relied on some documents produced by the state govt. As the said documents were not part of record, the state counsel filed them on affidavit. Taking them on record, the bench asked the appellants' counsel to respond to them as well by next hearing.
Hindustan Times
5 days ago
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
Allahabad HC orders status quo on merger of schools in Sitapur till Aug 21
In an important judgment, the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad high court on Thursday ordered to maintain the status quo on the merger of primary schools in Sitapur district and also pointed out that the interim order has nothing to do with the merit of the state government's policy and its implementation. The court has fixed the next hearing of the case on August 21. The high court passed the order only for Sitapur district after it noticed certain glaring discrepancies with respect to merger of schools there during hearing of the case. (For Representation) The high court passed the order only for Sitapur district after it noticed certain glaring discrepancies with respect to merger of schools there during hearing of the case. A division bench of Chief Justice Arun Bhansali and Justice Jaspreet Singh passed the order on two petitions—one by 5 children and the other by 17 children from Sitapur district through their parents. The petitioners had sought a stay on the July 7 order of the single judge bench of the high court which dismissed the petitions challenging the state government's June 16 order for merger of primary schools run by the basic education department of the state government. 'We make it clear that at this point of time the grant of interim order has nothing to do with the merit of the policy and its implementation as such,' the court said. Senior advocate LP Mishra and advocate Gaurav Mehrotra argued on behalf of the petitioners, whereas additional advocate general Anuj Kudesia and chief standing counsel Shailendra Kumar Singh argued on behalf of the state government. During the hearing, irregularities came to the fore in some documents of merger presented by the state government. They came to light when reference to the documents produced before the single judge bench (which dismissed the petitions against merger on July 7) was made. The court noticed certain discrepancies and pointed them out to the additional advocate general. In view of this, the court ordered to maintain the status quo on the merger process of primary schools in Sitapur district. Mishra argued that the state government's order to merge schools violates the Right to Free and Compulsory Education Act for children aged 6-14. He also raised concerns that the merger would create problems for young children as they would have to travel long distances to attend school. The government counsel apprised the court of such primary schools those have zero students. They also informed the court about primary schools where the strength of students was fewer than 15. Defending the merger of primary schools, the government counsel pointed out that it was in the larger interest of students. They said there will be more social activity and scope for development for a student who is relocated from a school having a few students to a school having 300 students.
Hindustan Times
5 days ago
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
Court orders not followed unless officials summoned, observes HC
The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad high court has observed that court orders are not being followed even after issuance of contempt notice unless the personal appearance of the officer concerned is ordered by the court. The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad high court made the observation on July 21. (FILE PHOTO) A division bench of Chief Justice Arun Bhansali and Justice Jaspreet Singh made this observation on July 21. The court was hearing a special appeal filed by the State of U.P. through its additional chief secretary, the department of basic education and others against the respondent Jai Singh and others. 'The attitude of the officers, in ignoring the orders passed by the court till such time that notices in the contempt petition are issued, cannot be approved. On many occasions, despite issuance of notices in contempt petition, no action is taken and it is only when the directions are issued for personal presence that for the first time, the officers care for the orders passed by the Court. There are hardly any appeals which are filed without application seeking condonation of delay, which conduct on part of the appellants cannot be appreciated/encouraged,' the high court observed. The court was dealing with a special appeal filed by the state against the order of a single-judge whereby the state was directed to permit respondents to continue in employment in the department along with payment of arrears of salary. The state filed an appeal against the said order with a delay of 345 days. In the application for condonation of delay, administrative reasons were given for justifying filing the appeal late. It was requested that the delay was unintentional, genuine and bona fide. The respondent, in his objection, pleaded that the story by the state was concocted. It was argued that cognizance of the order was taken for the first time after six months. The court observed that though after the judgment was passed, the state claimed to have sought opinions of standing counsel and chief standing counsel, no such opinion or request seeking opinion was placed on record. It also observed that the delay in seeking and providing opinions and the need for second opinions was not explained. The court said, 'In the entire affidavit, there is no intention to indicate the sufficient cause for seeking condonation of delay, only formality of indicating dates has been fulfilled and thereafter, sermons on the working of the Government have been indicated that it took time in completing the administrative formalities by following certain norms and procedure of 'disciplined and systematic performance of official functions' and that among the several factors on which depend the time consumed in process, there are 'certain unavoidable and unspoken circumstances.' The court observed that the limitation prescribed in the Limitation Act was being taken for granted by the State and the appellants approached the high court only after notices were issued in the contempt petition filed by the respondents. Declining to accept the delay condonation application, the court dismissed the appeal as barred by limitation.
Hindustan Times
6 days ago
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
School merger order violates RTE Act: Petitioners' counsel
LUCKNOW The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad high court on Tuesday began hearing two special appeal petitions challenging the merger of primary schools. The division bench, headed by Chief Justice Arun Bhansali and Justice Jaspreet Singh, heard arguments from the petitioners' lawyers. The hearing will continue on Wednesday. The two petitions have been filed in high court challenging the July 7 order of the single bench which had dismissed the petitions challenging merger of primary schools. Allahabad HC bench headed by the chief justice to continue hearing special appeals against the merger. (For Representation) Two special appeals have been filed—one by 5 children and the other by 17 children from Sitapur district through their parents. Senior advocate LP Mishra and advocate Gaurav Mehrotra are representing petitioners in court. They have completed their arguments in court. Mishra argued that the state government's order to merge schools violates the Right to Free and Compulsory Education Act, for children aged 6-14. He also raised concerns that the merger would create problems for young children as they would have to travel long distances to attend school. Now, the state government's lawyers are presenting their counter-arguments. Both sides are supporting their claims with precedents. On the other hand, the state government, represented by additional advocate general (AAG) Anuj Kudesia and chief standing counsel Shailendra Kumar Singh, argued that the merger was in the best interest of children, aiming to optimise resource utilisation. The government cited 18 primary schools with zero students and stated that merging such schools with nearby ones would ensure better use of teachers and facilities, ultimately improving education quality.
Time of India
11-07-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
No action plan to check monkey menace, Allahabad HC to issue notice to UP
Noida: The Allahabad high court on Thursday took strong exception to the Ghaziabad administration, UP govt, and Centre not filing their plan of action to check the monkey menace in the state, particularly in Ghaziabad. The court asked the registry to serve them with a notice. Expressing disappointment with the lackadaisical approach of the concerned authorities, the bench of chief justice Arun Bhansali and justice Kshitij Shailendra directed notices to be issued to the chairman of the Animal Welfare Board of India, member secretary of UP's State Animal Welfare Board, executive officers of Nagar Palika Parishad (Loni & Khoda Makanpur), and secretary of the Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, seeking replies by the next hearing on Aug 22. While acknowledging the response from Muradnagar's executive officer, the court reminded UP's chief secretary to file the affidavit as previously directed. You Can Also Check: Noida AQI | Weather in Noida | Bank Holidays in Noida | Public Holidays in Noida The remaining respondents include secretary union ministry of forest environment and climate change, district magistrate Ghaziabad, municipal commissioner, GMC, executive officer, Nagar Palika Parishad, Modi Nagar and vice chairman GDA. While hearing a PIL filed by Ghaziabad residents on May 6, the court sought a detailed reply from a dozen respondents by July 10, seeking a plan of action for checking rising instances of man-monkey conflicts. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like American Investor Warren Buffett Recommends: 5 Books For Turning Your Life Around Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List Undo Counsel of the petitioner said that there was a need for adequate infirmaries, veterinary care centres, transport/rescue vans, a relocation plan to forest areas, adequate provisions of food, and setting up a 24x7 helpline portal. The petition raised the issues of the increasing population of monkeys, increasing man-monkey conflict, hunger and loss of food to monkeys, their starvation, and the cruel/inhuman conditions the monkeys are living in. The counsel suggested that iIf the state authorities lack expertise, they can seek expert scientific advice from institutions like Wildlife Institute of India, IUCN etc.
