MEADA Vs. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Appeal has been filed as against the order of Writ Court dated 11.09.2013, in W.P.(MD)No.14776 of 2013, whereby and whereunder, the learned Single Judge dismissed the Writ Petition filed by the appellant to quash the order passed by the second respondent in his proceedings in Na.Ka.No.10858/PG2/2013, dated 21.06.2013.

(2.) The brief facts which are necessary for disposal of the Writ Appeal are as follows:

(3.) While so, on 13.08.2011, the first standard has 128 students, second standard has 142 students, third standard has 151 students, fourth standard has 173 students and fifth standard has 182 students. But, the appellant was not paid salary from the date of appointment, viz., 15.06.2011. She requested the fifth respondent to pay salary, who, in turn, has given an assurance that as soon as the salary was released by the fourth respondent, the salary would be paid to her. Subsequently, she came to know that the fifth respondent has not sent any proposal to the fourth respondent in respect of payment of salary to the petitioner. While so, her father received a communication from the third respondent stating that the post which she is holding is a surplus one. Challenging the same, the appellant preferred an appeal before the second respondent. However, the second respondent, by impugned proceedings dated 21.06.2013, rejected the appeal, confirming the order of the third respondent. Hence, the Writ Petition. However, the learned Single Judge dismissed the Writ Petition holding that as of now, there is no controversy before this Court that during the academic year 2010-2011, the post of Secondary Grade Teacher held by Mrs.Lilly Mary was declared as surplus and, therefore, on her retirement, there was no vacancy available for filling up the same and in such circumstances, the Management ought not to have appointed the appellant.