Tarun Agarwala, J. - (1.) The petitioner Dinesh Chandra Mishra was appointed as an Assistant Teacher in L.T, Grade on an adhoc basis on 9.7.1993. it transpires, that a Lecturer in Mathematics retired on 30.6.2003 and consequently, a vacancy arose on 1.7.2003. The petitioner, applied for a promotion as a Lecturer. Since his case was not being considered, he filed Civil Misc. Writ Petitior No. 2396 of 2003, which was disposed of, by a judgment dated 25.5.2003, directing the authorities to decide his representation with regard to his promotion on the post of Lecturer. The said claim was rejected by an order dated 29.8.2003 on the ground that his services were not regularised and that he had not completed five year of continuous services on the date of the vacancy. Subsequently, by an order of the Director of Education, as communicated by an order of the District Inspector of School dated 3.2.2004, the services of the petitioner were regularised with effect from 20.4.1998. By another order dated the 26.10.2004, the District Inspector of School directed the Committee of Management to forward the paper with regard to the promotion of the petitioner on the post of Lecturer. Inspite of this direction, on action was taken by the Committee of Management. Consequently the present writ petitioning was filed praying that the Committee of Management be directed to send the requisite papers to the authorities for the promotion of the petitioner as a lecturer in Mathematics and further prayed that the respondents be directed to promote the petitioner as a lecturer in Mathematics w.e.f. 30.6.2003.
(2.) The Committee of Management has filed a counter affidavit contending that the service of the petitioner was not regularised on the date of the occurrence of vacancy, i.e., on 1.7.2003 and that, the vacancy was notified under Rule 11 of the U.P. Secondary Education Services Selection Board Rules, 1998 to be filled up by way of direct recruitment, Consequently, the post in question was required to be filled up by way of direct recruitment.
(3.) The District Inspector of Schools has also filed a counter affidavit contending that the petitioner was earlier not eligible for the promotion and that his claim for promotion was earlier rejected by an order dated 29.8.2003, but now after his regularisation the petitioner is eligible for the promotion to the post of Lecturer. However, the respondents are facing difficulty in view of the fact that the requisition for filling up the vacancy by direct recruitment had already been sent to the Selection Board.;