K. N. Singh, J. - (1.) Ganesh Singh Anglo Sanskrit Pathshala Society (Mursan), Aligarh is a registend society which runs Ganesh Singh Anglo Sanskrit Inter College, Mursan, Aligarh. It is a recognised and aided institution under the provisions of the Intermediate Education Act. Selection for appointment to the post of Lecturer in Sanskrit was held. The petitioner who was already working in L. T. grade applied for the same. The Selection Committee selected Ram Gopal Sharma and on its recommendation the District Inspector of Schools accorded approval for his appointment as Lecturer in Sanskrit. Aggrieved the petitioner has filed the present petition for the issue of a writ of certiorari quashing the selection and the order of the District Inspector of School dated 19th October, 1974, according approval to the respondent's selection and appointment.
(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner urged that under the scheme of Administration of the institution Managing Committee has been elected but it is not functioning, instead the District Magistrate, Aligarh,' and Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Ha has, are acting illegally and they have usurped the power of the Committee of Management. The Selection Committee was not constituted by the Managing Committee instead it was constituted by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate and the District Magistrate. Since the Selection Committee was not constituted in accordance with law, the selection held by it on 2nd September, 1974, was illegal. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the District Inspector of Schools as well as on behalf of the District Magistrate and the Sub-Divisional Magistrate it is asserted that under the Scheme of Management, the Committee of Management is empowered to delegate its functions and powers. In accordance with that provision the Committee of Management of the institution delegated its functions and powers to the District Magistrate Aligarh, later on in 1965 delegated its functions to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate. It is further assert.d that the Committee of Management was constituted in accordance with the provisions contained in the Scheme of Administration and the Regulations framed under the U. P. Intermediate Education Act. The Selection Committee consisted of 5 persons. The petitioner has failed to place any material before me to show that the Selection Committee was not constituted in accordance with the Act and the Regulations framed thereunder. Further, on his own showing the petitioner knew about the alleged illegality in the constitution of the Selection Committee on 16th August, 1974 but even thereafter he appeared before the Selection Committee for interview on 2nd September, 1974 along with other candidates The petitioner was not selected instead respondent No. 9 Ram Gopal Sharma was selected and his selection and appointment was approved by the District Inspector of Schools on 19th October, 1974. It was only thereafter that the petitioner approached this Court and challenged the Constitution of Selection Committee. These facts clearly 'how that the petitioner took part before the Selection Committee and when he was not selected he returned round and sought to challenge the validity of the Selection Committee. Further the petitioner's only legal right was to be considered and he was in fact considered by the Selection Committee. His grievance that the Managing Committee was not allowed to function is untenable. The Management has not come forward to challenge the constitution of the Selection Committee nor 'it has raised any grievance against the alleged invasion of rights.
(3.) It was then urged that the petition was more qualified than Ram Gopal Sharma for appointment as Lecturer, as he possesses Post Graduate Degree in Hindi and Samkrit in addition to his teaching experience, while Ram Gopal Sharma has a Post Graduate Degree in third Division. In the counter affidavit filed by the Principal on behalf of the respondent it is stated that the Selection Committee was of the opinion that the petitioner was poor in personality and was not able to control the students, while respondent No. 9 was found more suitable for appointment to the post of Lecturer. There is no allegation that respondent No. 9 Ram Gopal Sharma was not eligible for appointment or then he did not possess requisite qualifications. The petitioner as well as Ram Gopal Sharma both were eligible for appointment and both were considered by the Selection Committee. It is not open to this Court to sit in appeal over the decision of the Selection Committee or to find out as to which of the two was more suitable for appointment to the post of Lecturer. It was within the jurisdiction of the Selection Committee and it found respondent No. 9 more suitable for the . post. It is not open to the petitioner to contend before this Court that he was more suitable or qualified for appointment to the said post.;