- (1.) Heard Sri Anil Bhushan, learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. This writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 11.8.2005 passed by respondent No. 2, Annexure-9 to the writ petition. Further prayer is to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to pay the salary to the petitioner from the date of his appointment w.e.f. 8.3.2004.
(2.) It appears that there is an institution namely Raja Sri Krishna Dutt Inter College, Jaunpur which is a recognized institution under the provisions of U.P. Intermediate Education Act and the institution is under the grant in aid from the State Government and U.P. High Schools and Intermediate Colleges (Payment of Salaries of Teachers and other Employees) Act 1971 is applicable. One Dina Nath Upadhyay was a permanent' Class-III employee who was working as Head Clerk in the institution, retired on 31.8.2003. One Sri Ashok Kumar Tiwari who was working on the post of Assistant Clerk was promoted as Head Clerk in the institution. Due to the promotion of Sri Ashok Kumar Tiwari a vacancy of Assistant Clerk came into existence. In such a situation, as per Chapter-III, Regulation 101, no appointment-shall be made unless and until there is a prior approval of the District Inspector of Schools, the Committee of Management sought an approval to fill up the aforesaid vacancy and a letter to that effect was sent and approval was granted on 24.12.2003. After obtaining approval, an advertisement in the newspaper was made and various candidates on the basis of advertisement, made application and petitioner was duly selected for the post of clerk and an appointment letter was issued in favour of the petitioner on 24.3.2004. All the relevant papers were sent for granting approval for the purpose of payment of salary but no orders were passed. Then the petitioner filed a writ petition before the Court as Writ Petition No. 36192 of 2004 which was finally disposed of directing the Regional Level Committee to take a decision with regard to the financial approval of the appointment of the petitioner. But the Regional Level Committee by the impugned order dated 11.8.2005 has rejected the claim of the petitioner on various grounds. One of the grounds was that advertisement was made after a lapse of about one month from the date of approval for making appointment dated 24.12.2003. Further ground has been taken that as regards the educational qualification, the typing experience has not been mentioned and according to the Government Order, the minimum qualification is intermediate with the knowledge of typing and no proper Selection Committee has been constituted. Further grounds have been taken that as the various persons were working on supernumerary posts under the Dying in Harness Rules and they have to be absorbed, therefore, the appointment of the petitioner is not valid. The petitioner aggrieved by the aforesaid order has filed the present writ petition.
(3.) Sri Anil Bhushan, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the grounds taken in the impugned order are not sustainable in law in view of the fact that the prior approval was taken as required under the law and after taking prior approval the appointment was made, therefore, if in the opinion of the District Inspector of Schools, who is the competent authority, if certain supernumerary post was to be filled up under the Dying in Harness Rules, the prior approval should not have been granted. If the District Inspector of Schools, after perusal of the relevant record, has granted a permission for making an appointment, then it cannot be disapproved only on the ground stated in the impugned order.;