Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal - (1.) HEARD Sri P.N. Saxena, Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Yogish Kumar Saxena, learned counsel for petitioner, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 5, Sri B.P. Yadav, learned counsel for respondent No. 6 and Sri Rajneesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondent No. 7.
(2.) THE writ petition is directed against order 30.7.2008 (Anenxure 9 to the writ petition) issued by District Inspector of Schools, Jaunpur (hereinafter referred as 'DIOS') directing management of committee of Janta Janardan Inter College, Jasupur, Chakia, Jaunpur (hereinafter referred as 'college') to ensure to provide charge of office of principal to Tej Bahadur Yadav so that there may not be any occasion of non-compliance of Apex Court's decision dated 16.5.2008. Brief facts giving rise to this writ petition are that college is recognized under provisions of U.P. Intermediate Act, 1921 (hereinafter referred as '1921 Act') and payment of salary is being made under U.P. Salary Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred as '1971 Act). The post of principal fell vacant on 30.6.2001 due to retirement of Awadhraj Yadav, the incumbent holding office of the principal. The vacancy was notified to U.P. Secondary Education Service Selection Board (hereinafter referred as 'Board'). The selection was held wherein the petitioner was placed at serial No. 1 and respondent No. 7 at serial No. 2 in the merit list (copy of selection list issued by the Board is Annexure 1 to the writ petition). Consequently, DIOS issued a letter dated 24.4.2003 directing management of the college (respondent No. 6) to issue letter of appointment to the petitioner appointing him on the post of principal. The petitioner approached respondent No. 6 and also submitted an application on 2.5.2003 requesting to allow him to join as principal of the college but he was refused by manager. The petitioner reported this fact to the DIOS who thereafter issued a letter dated 20.5.2003 and warned respondent No. 6 against non-appointment of the petitioner. In the meantime, advertisement issued by Board pursuant whereto the petitionerwas selected, was quashed by this Court vide judgment dated 16.10.2003 in a bunch of writ petitions. The matter was taken in appeal and in the meantime in another writ petition filed by Ram Dhani Yadav, this Court passed judgment on 23.5.2005 permitting his continuance as adhoc principal till regular selection is made by the Board. The judgment of this Court setting aside advertisement was reversed by Apex Court in Civil Appeal Nos. 3938-3939 of 2008, Balbir Kaur and another v. U.P. Secondary Education Service Selection Board, Allahabad and others, vide judgment dated 16.5.2008 whereafter the petitioner approached DIOS and the committee of management for appointment but instead the DIOS issued impugned order.
(3.) THE petitioner has also filed supplementary affidavit placing on record his application dated 2.5.2003 sent to manager of the college requesting for permitting his joining; letter dated 14.5.2003 sent to DIOS regarding denial of joining by management; the petitioner's letter dated 20.5.2003 sent to DIOS as reminder and letter dated 31.5.2003 sent by DIOS to manager stating that he should ensure appointment of petitioner failing which responsibility would lie on the management. On behalf of respondent Nos. 1,3,4 and 5, counter-affidavit has been filed sworn by Km.Sudha Vaidhya, Principal, Government Girls Inter College, Madiyahu, Jaunpur stating that manager of the college actually issued a letter of appointment to petitioner on 12.5.2003 but the petitioner did not respond. Thereafter reminder sent on 27.5.2003 yet petitioner failed to join. Later on, the petitioner sent a letter dated 18.11.2003 expressing his inability to join the college and in these circumstances, next selected candidate in the panel was issued appointment by committee of management. It is also said that there was a dispute between two persons claiming ad hoc appointment of the principal in the college. Writ petitions No. 11937 of 2004 and 54952 of 2004 were filed which have nothing to do with the cause relating to petitioner. Further, the Special Leave Petition before Apex Court against judgment of this Court had also nothing to do with this petitioner but it relates to matter between the adhoc principal and respondent No. 7, hence the petitioner cannot claim any advantage thereof. Basically since the petitioner has declined to join the college vide letter dated 18.11.2003 (a copy whereof has been place on record as Annexure 1 to the counter-affidavit) the management appointed next person in the merit list and for a long time the petitioner did not claim appointment on the post of principal in the college hence stopped.;