K. N. Goyal, J. - (1.) :-
(2.) THE petitioner is the Committee of Management of the Rani Laxmi Bai Girls Inter College Unnao. THE institution was originally upto High School standard but it seems to have been up-graded to Intermediate in 1974. In the Intermediate section history was one of the subjects for which the institution was recognised. THE Principal, opposite party no. 4 (who, we are informed, has since died) asked one of the existing teachers Smt. Ramsri Dikshit, opposite party no. 5, to undertake the work of teaching Intermediate Classes in history. M. A. degree was the prescribed minimum qualification for Lecturer ship, Smt. Dikshit was at that time only m. A. (Previous) in history. She passed m. A. only in 1975. On 7-2-76 the Director of Education issued an order according his approval to the creation of a post of Lecturer in history in lieu of the existing post of L. I. Grade teacher. This order is annexure-1. As noticed above, the opposite party no. J was already teaching history to the Intermediate Classes under an order of Principal. She continued to do so. No formal order of appointment of opposite party no. 5 to the newly created post was ever made by the Management. THE Management was even aggrieved by the creation of the new post as it contended that it had never applied to the authorities for creation or up-gradation of the post in question. It appears, however, that the authorities had received a letter from the then acting Manager K. D, Gupta dated 23-10-75, which is annexure E-1 to the counter affidavit, in which be had sought approval for creation of this post. THE Management also questioned the Principals authority to take the work of lecturer from opposite party no. 5. THE authorities, namely, the D.I.O.S. and the R.I.G.S., at different stages, as appears from the correspondence placed on the record, took contrary position, sometimes up-holding the contention of the Management and at others the stand of the Principal. Ultimately, however, the D.I.O.S. directed the Management to pay the salary of the opposite party No. 5 for the post of lecturer on which she had been working since 7-2-76. THE petitioner Committee has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution praying that the order dated 7-2-76 approving the creation of the new post and the order dated 24-10-77 annexure-17 and one dated 23-10-77 annexure-19 to the writ petition directing payment of the salary to opposite party no. 5 for the post of lecturer be quashed. It was also directed in the order dated 28-10-77 annexure-19 that a formal proposal for the promotion of Smt. Dikshit should be sent within two weeks failing which necessary action shall be taken for which the Management shall be responsible. The petition has been contested only on behalf of opposite parties no. 4 and 5, namely, the deceased Principal and the teacher concerned. The contention of the teacher opposite party no. 5 is that as the post which she was holding had been up-graded no formal order of the Management was required. lit was also contended that the appointment should be deemed to be under the U. P. Secondary Education (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 1973, para 2 (c) and should be deemed to have been regularised under Section 16-GG of the Intermediate Education Act. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
(3.) NO provision could be shown to us on behalf of the teacher by her learned counsel Sri D. S. Bajpai which may provide for an automatic promotion of a serving L. T. Grade teacher to an upgraded post of lecturer without any procedure being followed and without any order of the Committee of Management. The old regulations 19 and 20 of Chapter 3, which were deleted on 7th July, 1976, and the new regulation 6 of Chapter 2 of the regulations made under the Intermediate Education Act which superseded the old regulations, both provide for a procedure for selection to be followed by the Committee of Management. Of course, the involvement of D.I.O.S. is there, inasmuch as his approval is required to the proposal of the Committee of Management. But there is nothing in these provisions which may have the effect of conferring any power on the D.I.O.S. to make any appointment to a post by promotion, even though such a post may have been created through up-gradation of an L. T. Grade teacher's post. NOt only this, regulation 20 of Chapter 2 provides that in the event of failure of the Committee of Management to till the post in accordance with the regulation within a period of three months from the date of the occurrence of the vacancy such post shall be deemed to have been surrendered and shall not be filled up unless its creation is sanctioned afresh by the Director. The reference to para 2 (c) of the aforesaid Removal of Difficulties Order also does not advance the case of the opposite party no. 5 any further. For para 2 (c) is related to para 2 (a) which provides for a power to the Committee of Management to make ad-hoc appointments in the manner laid down in the succeeding sub-paragraphs including para 2 (c). Thus para 2 (c) does not provide for automatic appointment of the senior most teacher on ad-hoc basis. There is controversy as to whether opposite party no. 5 was the senior-most teacher or not and also as to whether she was the only qualified teacher available at the relevant time for appointment. In any event in view of the fact that there is no order of the Committee of Management under para 2 (a) opposite party no. 5 cannot be deemed to have been appointed on ad-hoc basis under para 2 (c). Accordingly, Section 16-GG is not attracted either, for Section 16-GG merely regularies ad-hoc appointments made by the Management. If an ad-hoc appointment has not been made at all there is no question of regularisation.;