R.K. Agrawal, J. - (1.) BOTH these appeals have been filed against the common judgment and order dated 9th February 2011 passed by the learned single Judge whereby the writ petitions preferred by the Appellants have been dismissed.
(2.) IN the district of Aligarh, there is a college known as Sanskrit Kanya Pathshala Inter College (hereinafter referred to as the Institution). It is recognised under the provisions of U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and is aided (up to High School) by the Government of Uttar Pradesh. The provisions of U.P. High School And Intermediate Colleges (Payment of Salary to Teachers and other Employees) Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the 1971 Act) is applicable. The provisions of U.P. Secondary Education Services Commission and Selection Boards Act, 1982 (hereinafter referred to as the 1982 Act) is also applicable to the Institution. One Km. Madhu Raizada was appointed on 13.01.1977 as Assistant Teacher in the said Institution against a clear vacancy in C.T. Grade. She was subsequently appointed in February 1980 as an Assistant Teacher in Government Intermediate College, Etah where she was later on confirmed. She had initially applied leave for six months which was granted by the Committee of Management. The Committee of Management treated the vacancy as a short term vacancy and proceeded to make ad hoc appointment in accordance with the procedure prescribed in U.P. Secondary Education Services Commission (Removal of Difficulties)(2nd) Order, 1981. Km. Anju Saxena, the Appellant in Special Appeal No. 270(D) of 2011 claims to have been appointed on 01.08.1984 as ad hoc Assistant Teacher in C.T. Grade. Initially the appointment was up to 31.12.1984. Her appointment was extended from time to time with intermittent breaks i.e., from 05.01.1985 to 20.05.1985, 15.07.1985 to 31.12.1985, 08.01.1986 to 19.05.1986, 14.07.1986 to 31.12.1986, 05.01.1987 to 20.05.1987, 05.01.1988 to 20.05.1988, July 1989 to May 1990 and July 1990 to May 1991. She was paid salary for the actual period during which she had worked. Her salary was stopped after May 1991 whereupon she approached this Court by filing Writ Petition No. 16481 of 1991, which was disposed of vide judgment and order dated 05.05.1995 by directing her to prefer a representation before the Regional Inspectress of Girls School to be decided by the concerned authority within a time bound period. Pursuant to the directions contained in the judgment and order dated 05.05.1995, she made a representation on 16.08.1995, which was followed by a reminder on 15.06.1996. The Regional Deputy Director of Education vide order dated 09.10.1997 had rejected her representation. Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 09.10.1997 passed by the Regional Deputy Director of Education, Agra, she once again approached this Court by means of Writ Petition No. 39754 of 1997 (giving rise to the present appeal) seeking quashing of the said order and also seeking a direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondents therein to consider her claim for regularisation under Section 33B of the 1982 Act and to pay salary for the period 01.08.1984 to 20.05.1985 and for the period during which notional breaks were given and to treat her to be continuing in service. It may be mentioned here that vide order dated 09.10.1997, the Regional Deputy Director of Education had held that though she was appointed as ad hoc C.T. Grade teacher in place of Km. Madhu Raizada for the period 01.08.1984 till 20.05.1988 for intermittent period, she has worked in the Institution as part time teacher from 01.07.1989 till May 1991 and from 01.01.1995 Smt. Meenakshi Sharma has been appointed as ad hoc teacher till Km. Madhu Raizada returns or a regular candidate is selected by the Commission. Therefore, Km. Anju Saxena is not entitled for any benefits as claimed by her. The Regional Deputy Director of Education had further held that as Km. Madhu Raizada was a teacher in C.T. Grade and there was no vacancy of L.T. Grade, the appointment of Smt. Meenakshi Sharma is irregular, which is liable to be cancelled.
(3.) ACCORDING to Smt. Meenakshi Sharma, who is the Appellant in Special Appeal No. 406 of 2011, a post of Assistant Teacher in L.T. Grade fell vacant on account of the leave/absence of Km. Madhu Raizada and the advertisement for filling up the vacancy was published on 16.02.1995 in "Amar Ujala". After facing the Selection Committee, she was selected and was given appointment vide order dated 30.09.1995. The appointment was made on purely ad hoc basis from 01.08.1985 till 31.01.1996 which was also approved by the Regional Deputy Director of Education vide order dated 30.09.1995. She was reappointed on 05.01.1996, which was also approved by the Regional Director of Education vide order dated 25.01.1996. The term was extended till 21.01.1997. However, vide order dated 13.01.1997, the Committee of Management terminated the services of Smt. Meenakshi Sharma. The order dated 13.01.1997 passed by the Committee of Management was challenged by Smt. Meenakshi Sharma by filing Writ Petition No. 2680 of 1997 (giving rise to the present appeal). This Court vide interim order dated 21.01.1997 directed her to continue on the post of Assistant Teacher in L.T. Grade and also for payment of salary in accordance with law until further orders or till the availability of a regularly selected candidate whichever is earlier. Smt. Meenakshi Sharma continued to work in the Institution on the strength of the interim order dated 21.01.1997 passed by this Court.;