Arun Tandon, J. - (1.) Heard Sri Devendra Dahma, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Sri Piyush Shukla, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents. It is not necessary to issue notice to the respondent No. 1 or call for counter affidavit from the respondents, in view of the order proposed to be passed by this Court in the present writ petition.
(2.) Petitioner, Smt. Rajni Sharma, has filed this writ petition for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent No. 2, namely District Basic Shiksha Adhikari, respondent No. 2 to accord approval to appointment of the petitioner on the post of Assistant Teacher in Church City Junior High School, Undercoat, District Meerut.
(3.) On behalf of the petitioner it is contended that the petitioner has obtained a degree of post graduation i.e. MA. (English) and is also Br.Ed. (reference Para No. 3 of the writ petition). It is further submitted that since there was a shortage of teachers in the institution and permanent appointment against the vacancy could not be made, the Committee or Management decided to make appointment under Rule 20 of the U.P. Recognized Basic School (Junior High Schools) (Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Teachers) Rules, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules). It is claimed that on the basis of the selection made by the Committee of Management the petitioner has been appointed as Assistant Teacher in the institution managed by the respondent No. 1. The relevant papers in that regard have been transmitted to the District Basic Education Officer, Meerut respondent No. 2, who is under obligation to communicate the decision, after approving or disapproving the appointment made by the Committee of Management. However, the District Basic Education Officer has failed to consider the matter of appointment of the petitioner made by the Committee of Management. Hence the present writ petition.;