M.Katju, J. - (1.) Head learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) The petitioner is challenging the impugned order of the Director of Higher Education, U.P. dated 4.5.1999 Annexure-19 to the writ petition. In that order, it has been mentioned that the Manager of Saraswati Maha Vidyalaya, Hathras, has informed that the petitioner was never appointed as lecturer in Chemistry on ad hoc basis in the institution in question. The Regional Higher Education Officer also made an enquiry in this connection and he also accepted the version of the Manager.
(3.) The petitioner alleged that he was appointed as ad hoc lecturer in Chemistry by appointment letter dated 5.11.1991 Annexure-1 to the writ petition. In paragraph 4 of the petition. it is alleged that a certificate has been given by the Head of Department of Chemistry regarding the working of the petitioner as lecturer in Chemistry. Subsequently, an Ordinance was issued for regularizing the service of ad hoc lecturers vide Annexure-4 to the writ petition. In paragraph 6 of the petition it is alleged that since the papers for regularizing the petitioner were not sent by the Management, the petitioner wrote a letter to the respondent No. 1 on 11.6.1997 vide Annexure-5 to the writ petition. Thereafter the petitioner wrote a letter to the principal and Secretary of the Management vide Annexures-6 and 7 to the writ petition. He also made a representation to the Director of Education vide Annexure-8 to the writ petition. In paragraph 9 of the writ petition, it is stated that the Director asked the Manager and Principal to submit the relevant papers regarding the petitioner's appointment vide Annexure-9 to the writ petition. The Director of Higher Education vide letter dated 27.1.1998 appointed the Regional Higher Education Officer. Agra as Enquiry Officer vide Annexure-10. In paragraph 11 it is stated that the Regional Higher Education Officer submitted a report in favour of the petitioner vide Annexure 11. In paragraph 12 of the petition, it is stated that the petitioner was found suitable for regularlsation by the Selection Committee and an order dated 6.3.1998 was issued vide Annexure-12. However, it is stated in paragraph 13 of the petition that since the orders were not issued by the institution, the petitioner approached the Principal and Manager and he wrote a letter to the Director of Education dated 14.5.1998 vide Annexure-13 to the writ petition. He also submitted a letter to the Minister vide Annexure-14. He also submitted further representations vide Annexures-15 to 17 to the writ petition.;