- (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties and perused the pleadings of writ petition.
(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that the petitioner being the senior -most Lecturer in P.D. Pandey Inter College, Sonaisa, District Faizabad (hereinafter referred to as 'the College') was appointed as L.T. Grade Teacher in the College on 20.07.1968 and was promoted on the post of Lecturer on 26.07.1974. Due to retirement of Shri S.K. Ojha, the vacancy of ad -hoc Principal was to be filled in by promotion of senior -most Lecturer in the College till a regularly selected candidate is sent by the U.P. Secondary Education Services and Selection Board. The provisions of U.P. Secondary Education (Services and Selection Board) Act, 1982 (for short, 'the Act') provide that the vacancy of the post of Principal is to be filled on purely ad -hoc basis by promoting the senior -most Lecturer in the Lecturer grade. The Committee of Management, in violation of the provisions of the aforesaid Act, promoted Shri Rakesh Kumar Pandey, who is junior to the petitioner in Lecturer grade, on 30.06.2002. The petitioner on 05.07.2002 submitted a representation to the District Inspector of Schools against the illegal act of the Committee of Management promoting Shri Rakesh Kumar Pandey on the post of ad -hoc Principal. Upon the representation of the petitioner, the District Inspector of Schools vide his letter dated 05.09.2002 directed the Manager of the College to submit a seniority list of the Lecturers counter -signed by each Lecturer and also submit an explanation as to why the senior -most Lecturer was not appointed as ad -hoc Principal. The Management, however, did not pay any heed to the letter of DIOS and as such the petitioner filed Writ Petition No.5678 (SS) of 2002. This Court vide interim order dated 03.10.2002 provided that if there is nothing against the petitioner and he is the senior -most teacher then he should be given a chance in terms of the Rules as officiating Principal of the Institution till the next date of listing. When the order dated 03.10.2002 came to the knowledge of the Management, the petitioner was placed under suspension and a charge sheet dated 10.10.2002 was served upon him. The petitioner then again approached this Court by filing Writ Petition No.844 (SS) of 2003 challenging the suspension order. This Court vide interim order dated 07.02.2003, stayed the suspension order of the petitioner and directed the opposite parties to complete the enquiry expeditiously. The petitioner also filed another Writ Petition No.597 (SS) of 2004 challenging the appointment of Shri Rakesh Kumar Pandey, opposite party no.5, as ad -hoc Principal. It was further prayed that opposite parties be directed to appoint the senior -most teacher of the College as ad -hoc Principal till regularly selected candidate comes and joins the post.
(3.) DURING the course of argument, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has already retired from service and now he confines his prayer only to the extent that he may be given notional promotion with effect from the date when the earlier Principal Shri S.K. Ojha retired i.e. 30.06.2002 and the petitioner be also paid the salary from the aforesaid date till the date of his superannuation. Learned counsel for opposite parties have submitted that after the retirement of Shri S.K. Ojha from the post of Principal the same was to be filled in by giving ad -hoc promotion to the senior -most Lecturer but the criteria of promotion is not only seniority but also fitness and eligibility. The petitioner was not found fit for promotion on account of doubtful integrity and as such a charge sheet was served upon him and he was placed under suspension. In these circumstances, the charge of Principal was handed over to the next senior -most Lecturer who is opposite party no.5, Shri Rakesh Kumar Pandey. However, in compliance of the orders of this Court, the suspension order of the petitioner was revoked and he was permitted to continue on the post of Lecturer. Learned counsel for opposite parties have also submitted that since the petitioner has already retired and his work during the service period was not found satisfactory and he was not found fit for promotion, therefore, at this stage, he cannot be given notional promotion. It is also a submission on behalf of the opposite parties that since the petitioner has not worked on the post of ad -hoc Principal, the question of payment of salary to the petitioner as admissible to the post of Principal, does not arise.;