R.H. Zaidi, J. - (1.) PETITIONER , by means of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenges the validity of the resolution of the committee of management of Inter College, Kanchausi Bazar, Etawah dated 26.11.1978 promoting the Respondent No. 3 to the post of lecturer and the order of the District Inspector of Schools dated 5.1.1979 approving the said promotion and further claims his promotion to the post of lecturer.
(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that in October, 1978 the post in question was newly created, the committee of management vide its resolution dated 26.11.78 proposed to promote Sri Jagat Narain Tiwari, the Respondent No. 3 to the said post. The aforesaid proposal of committee of management was objected to by the Petitioner before the District Inspector of Schools. The District Inspector of Schools vide his order dated 5.1.1979 approved the proposal of the committee of management to promote Sri Jagat Narain Tiwari to the post in question. The Petitioner by means of this petition has challenged the resolution of the committee of management dated 26.11.1978 and the order of District Inspector of Schools dated 5.1.79 referred to above. In brief, it was pleaded by the Petitioner that on 16.7.73, he was appointed as assistant teacher in L.T. grade in the College, he has been, since then, continuously working as the teacher and has been teaching civics to the High School and Intermediate classes. He has been giving good results and his work and conduct was always appreciated and praised by the authorities of the College. He claimed that except him, no other teacher is eligible to be promoted to the post in question in as much, as only he had the requisite experience of teaching of civics in the College. He pleaded that Respondent No. 3 was a teacher of science and mathematics of High School classes and had no experience of teaching of civics. The committee of management without following the procedure prescribed under the law arbitrarily promoted the Respondent No. 3 to the post of lecturer and the District Inspector of Schools has also erred in law in approving the same.
(3.) IN the counter -affidavit filed by Respondent No. 3, the facts stated in the writ petition have been controverted. He claimed that he was senior to the Petitioner inasmuch as he was appointed on 8.7.1972 while the Petitioner was appointed on 16.7.73. He further stated that he also possessed the degree of M.A. in Political Science, therefore, he was eligible to be promoted to the post in question in preference to the Petitioner. He further pleaded that one Shri Sarvesh Chandra Dubey, who also possessed the degree of M.A. in Political Science, was also Junior to him. in the select list, the name of Respondent No. 3 was placed at serial No. 1, of Sarvesh Chandra Dubey at serial No. 2 and the name of the Petitioner at serial No. 3, Sri Sarvesh Chandra Dubey having not challenged the appointment of the Respondent No. 3, the Petitioner has no locus standi to challenge his promotion.;