Hon'ble Arun Tandon, J. - (1.) UNDER the U.P. Secondary Education Services Selection Board Act, 1982 (herein after referred to as the 'Act, 1982') two separate source of appointment (other than absorption/regularization) have been provided against the post of teachers of recognized Intermediate institutions i.e.: (a) By direct recruitment. (b) By promotion.
(2.) SO far as the direct recruitment is concerned, the appointment can be made by any of the following modes: (a) On the recommendation of the Selection Board (Ref. Section 16(1) of the Act, 1982). (b) By transfer in accordance with Regulations 55 to 62 of Chapter III of the Regulations framed under the Intermediate Education Act. (Ref. Section 16 (1) Second Proviso of the Act, 1982. (c) By compassionate appointment under Regulations 101 to 106 of the Regulations framed under the Intermediate Education Act (Ref. Section 16 (2) Proviso of the Act, 1982). The controversy with regard to appointment by mode (b) and (c) against a post of Assistant Teacher which had been requisitioned to the U.P. Secondary Education Services Selection Board and the scope of Section 13(5) of Act, 1982 was subject matter of consideration before the Single Judge in writ petition No. 40377 of 2008 (Raja Ram v. State of U.P. and others). This Court, after considering the provisions of Act, 1982 specifically the provisions of Section 13(5) and 16, recorded that once the vacancy has been requisitioned to the Selection Board, then no appointment can be made except on the recommendation of the Selection Board.
(3.) THE Court held that in respect of posts to be filled by direct recruitment, it is for the management to resort any of the modes available to it, under Clause a, b, and c as above. However, such discretion was limited to the stage of requisition being sent to the Selection Board as per the statutory requirement of Rule 11 of the U.P. Secondary Education Services Selection Board Rules, 1998. THE Court found that once the requisition is sent by the Management to the Selection Board, the vacancies come within the jurisdiction of Selection Board. THE Selection Board in turn, after computation of vacancies is required to advertise the same for direct recruitment and for the purpose to apply reservation. Any interference in the process in between by reducing the vacancies so requisitioned would result in the entire selection being prejudiced. Similarly the selected candidates can opt for the post which had been requisitioned but has subsequently been filled by transfer or by compassionate appointment so as to create an uncalled for complication. It was also held that under Section 13(5), adjustment of a selected candidate can only be made against a vacancy advertised in the same Advertisement. This is more so when no application for compassionate appointment on the post of teacher was pending on the date of requisition. The judgment of the Single Judge was subject matter of challenge byway of Special Appeal No 9.146 of 2010(U. P. Secondary Education Services Selection Board, Allahabad v. State of U.P. and others). The appeal has been dismissed by a reasoned judgment of the Division Bench of this Court on 21.1.2011. The Division Bench has held that once the vacancy has been requisitioned to the Selection Board, there could be no other mode of appointment except on recommendation of the Selection Board. Adjustment of selected candidate under Section 13(5) could only be made against a vacancy subject matter of same advertisement.;