Janardan Sahai, J. - (1.) The dispute in this writ petition relates to the claim for appointment as ad hoc Principal of an Intermediate College between the petitioner and the 3rd respondent. The petitioner is undisputedly senior to the 3rd respondent but the District Inspector of Schools has by the order dated 31.5.2002, which is impugned in this writ petition held that the petitioner is not eligible as he does not possess the necessary minimum qualifications provided for the post of Principal under Appendix-A of Chapter 2 of the Regulations framed under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act. The District Inspector of Schools has directed that the 3rd respondent Onkar Datt Tiwari, who is a lecturer, is entitled to work as ad hoc Principal until a regularly selected candidate from the Board comes to Join. In paragraph 7 of the petition, the petitioner has described his qualification as a Graduate from the Gorakhpur University of the year 1960, B.Ed, of the year 1961 and M.Ed. from the Gorakhpur University. The essential qualification for the post of Principal set out in Appendix-A are quoted below : "1. Head of the institution.--(1) Trained M.A. or M.Sc. or M.Com. or M.Sc. (Agriculture) or any equivalent post-graduate or any other degree which is awarded by corporate body specified in above mentioned para one and should have at least teaching experience of four years in classes 9 to 12 in any training institute or in any institution or university specified in above mentioned para one or in any degree college affiliated to such university or Institution, recognised by Board or any institution affiliated from Boards of other States or such other institutions whose examinations are recognised by the Board, or should the condition is also that he/she should not be below 30 years of age. or (2) First or second class Post-Graduate Degree along with teaching experience of ten years in Intermediate Classes of any recognised institutions or third class Post-Graduate Degree with teaching experience of fifteen years. or (3) Trained post-graduate diploma-holder in science. The condition is that he has passed this diploma course in first or second class and have efficiently worked for 15 of 20 years respectively after passing such diploma course."
(2.) The contention of Dr. R.G. Padia, learned counsel for the petitioner is that M.Ed. is a Post-Graduate Degree and the District Inspector of Schools erred in holding that M.Ed, was not sufficient qualification.
(3.) On the other hand, Shrt R.S. Mishra, learned counsel for the third respondent drew a distinction between a training or professional qualification on the one hand and an educational qualification on the other hand. He submitted that M.Ed. training is a professional qualification for teaching but is not an academic qualification. Support is drawn by him by reference to Serial No. 1 of Appendix-A, which provides the qualification for head of Institution as trained M.A. or M.Sc. or M.Com. or M.Sc. (Agriculture) or any equivalent Post-Graduate degree. It is submitted that M.Ed. is included as a training qualification in paragraph 2 of the Appendix-A, which defines the word 'trained' to mean Post-Graduate training qualification.;