MUKTI NATH RAI Vs. DISTRICT INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS, GORAKHPUR AND OTHERS
LAWS(ALL)-1991-8-109
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on August 03,1991

MUKTI NATH RAI Appellant
VERSUS
District Inspector of Schools, Gorakhpur and Others Respondents

JUDGEMENT

S.R.Singh, J. - (1.) Sarvodaya Kisan Intermediate College, Gorakhpur (hereinafter referred to as 'College') is a recognised and aided Intermediate College, the affairs of which are being managed by a Committee of Management constituted in accordance with the Scheme of Administration as approved under Section 16-A of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act (hereinafter referred to in short as 'Act'). With the promulgation of U.P. Secondary Education Services Commission and Selection Boards Ordinance, 1981 followed by the U.P. Act No. 8 of 1982 the appointment of teachers in the College stands governed by the provisions contained in the said Act which visualised Constitution of Selection Board for appointment of teachers in C.T. Grade and Constitution of a Commission for appointment of the Scheduled teachers, namely teachers in L.T. Grade, Lecturer and Principal. Admittedly, the Selection Board contemplated by the Act, never came into being whereas the Commission for purpose of selection of the scheduled teachers was constituted and the same is functioning.
(2.) Upon the occurrence of a substantive vacancy in C. T. Grade, the Committee of Management of the College as is borne out from the facts on record, advertised the post on its notice board and invited applications for selection and appointment as such on ad-hoc basis. The petitioner was selected for appointment on ad-hoc basis by the Committee of Management and the papers were forwarded to the District Inspector of Schools for approval. On receipt of papers, the District Inspector of Schools accorded approval vide letter dated 6-10-1981, but subsequently, he recalled approval accorded to the selection of the petitioner by means of the order dated 22-10-1981. Aggrieved by the said order recalling approval, the Management Committee took up the matter with the Deputy Director of Education under Clause (7) of U. P. Secondary Educational Service Commission (Ramoval of Difficulties) Order, 1981. The appeal was allowed by the Deputy Director, Education 7th Region, Gorakhpur vide order dated 23-8-1982 and the order passed by the District Inspector of Schools dated 22-10-1981, was set aside. In substance, the petitioner's adhoc appointment as approved by the District Inspector of Schools by letter dated 6-10-1981, was upheld and affirmed by the Deputy Director of Education. This appointment was not strictly in conformity with the provisions of U. P. Secondary Education Services Commission (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 1981, in that the procedure contemplated by Clause (5), oi the said Removal of Difficulties Order was not followed and the selection of the petitioner was not made by the District Inspector of Schools but it was made by the Committee of Management itself, nevertheless, the adhoc appointment was referable to no provision of law except the provisions contained in U. P. Secondary Education Services Commission (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 1981 and the adhoc appointment of the petitioners shall be deemed to be an appointment under Clause 5 of the said Removal of Difficulties Order.
(3.) Learned Counsel for the respondent pressed before me a Division Bench authority of this Court reported in UPLBEC 1990 (2) 1215, Brijesh Chand Yadav v. D. J. O. S., and contended on that basis that since the appointment of the petitioner was not made by the District Inspector of Schools under Clause 5 of the Removal of Difficulties Order, 1981, which visualises selection on the basis of quality point marks, it would not be deemed to be an appointment under the provisions of U. P. Secondary Education Services Commission (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 1981 for purposes of Section 33-A of U. P. Act No. 8 of 1982, which provides for regularisation of adhoc appointment made directly before the commencement of U. P. Secondary Education Services Commission and Selection Boards (Amendment) Ordinance, 1985, against a substantive vacancy in accordance with paragraph 2 of U. P. Secondary Education Services Commission (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 1981, as amended from time to time, who possesses the qualifications prescribed under, or is exempted from such qualifications in accordance with the provisions of the Intermediate Education Act, 1921, with effect from the date of commencement, namely, 12-6-1985.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.