- (1.) THESE two special appeals have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.
(2.) WE have heard Sri R. K. Ojha, learned Counsel for the appellant in special appeal of Jagdish Singh and Sri S. K. Verma, Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Siddharth Verma in special appeal of Sanjay Kumar and Sri Ran Vijay Singh, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. Special Appeal No. 178 of 2006 filed by Jagdish Singh is against the judgment and order dated 27th January, 2006 passed by a learned single Judge of this Court dismissing the writ petition of the appellant challenging the order of the District Inspector of Schools, Bhadohi dated 18th September, 2003 refusing to approve the appointment of the appellant as Class IV employee of a recognized aided institution, namely, Indra Bahadur Singh International Inter College, Bhadohi. Brief facts necessary for deciding the appeal No. 178 of 2006 are; that a Class IV vacancy arose in the institution due to retirement of an incumbent. The case of the appellant is that the committee of management was permitted to start process of selection by the District Inspector of Schools vide his letter dated 11th March, 1998 in pursuance of which advertisement was issued on 11th March, 1998 calling the candidates to appear on 22nd March, 1998 at 10. 00 A. M. in the institution for interview. The appellant's case is that the appellant applied and appeared for interview and was selected on 22nd March, 1998 on which date the appointment letter was also issued. The papers were forwarded by the Principal to the District Inspector of Schools for approval, on which the District Inspector of Schools has taken a decision on 18th September, 2003 after an order of this Court dated 4th May, 2003 passed in Writ Petition No. 20336 of 2000. The District Inspector of Schools by the impugned order has taken the view that the advertisement for appointment of the appellant was not published in two newspapers having wide circulation nor the information of the vacancy was given to the Employment Exchange. The order further states that details of the selection committee have not been made available and it is also not clear that how many applicants applied. The permission dated 11th March, 1998 was also said to be not issued from the office as per the statement made by the Camp Clerk Sri V. D. Pandey. The District Inspector of Schools has further taken view that there is a ban on the appointment, hence approval cannot be granted. The order dated 18th March, 1998 was challenged by the appellant in the writ petition which has been dismissed by the learned single Judge.
(3.) SPECIAL appeal of Sanjay Kumar is against the judgment and order dated 20th February, 2006 by which judgment a learned single Judge has dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant. The appellant had filed the writ petition claiming that he is entitled for salary as Class IV employee. The appellant's case was that permission was given by the District Inspector of Schools for filling up Class IV post vide letter dated 5th March, 2001 and in pursuance of which, advertisement was issued on 8th March, 2001 and thereafter the appointment letter was issued to the appellant on 26th March, 2001 and the appellant thereafter joined on 27th March, 2001 and was working. The papers were forwarded for approval by the District Inspector of Schools, which were forwarded to the Regional Committee by the District Inspector of Schools, which were returned by the Regional Committee and subsequently another advertisement was issued on 28th April, 2002 in which the appellant also participated and some other person was selected and appointed. Sri R. K. Ojha as well as Sri S. K. Verma, Senior Advocate appearing for the appellants submitted that under Regulation 101 of Chapter III of U. P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 permission is required from the District Inspector of Schools for filling up the post and the permission having been granted by the District Inspector of Schools for appointment of the appellant, the selection of the appellant was complete and no error was committed by the appointing authority in giving appointment letter and permitting the appellant to join. It is submitted that the permission granted by the District Inspector of Schools, as claimed in the case of Jagdish Singh dated 11th March, 1998 and dated 5th March, 2001 in the case of Sanjay Kumar was sufficient which fully empowered the appointing authority to fill up the post.;