SATYAWATI SAXENA Vs. REGIONAL DY. DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION MORADABAD AND ORS.
LAWS(ALL)-2016-5-176
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on May 27,2016

Satyawati Saxena Appellant
VERSUS
Regional Dy. Director Of Education Moradabad And Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, J. - (1.) This writ petition has been filed, praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus, directing and commanding the respondents to take work from petitioner and to pay salary, to which petitioner is entitled as per law.
(2.) From the materials brought on record, it transpires that Arya Kanya Inter College, Moradabad, is a recognized institution under provisions of U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921, upon which provisions of Payment of Salaries Act, 1971 are applicable. A vacancy is said to have been caused on the post of Lecturer in Hindi, on account of retirement of one Smt. Mithlesh Kumari Saxena on 30th June, 1993. It seems that vacancy was notified to the Commission, but no recommendation for appointment was made. Committee of Management, consequently, proceeded to advertise the post, and ad hoc appointment was granted to the petitioner, pursuant to selection proceedings undertaken for ad hoc appointment. Petitioner claims that though she was allowed to work, but she was not given salary. It is claimed that District Inspector of Schools had called for certain comments from the Committee of Management, but petitioner was neither allowed to work, nor paid salary. It is further claimed that Regional Deputy Director of Education, Moradabad, by an order passed on 15.7.1996, approved ad hoc appointment of petitioner, but despite such order, petitioner was neither permitted to work, nor was paid salary, as a result whereof, petitioner was compelled to approach this Court by filing the present writ petition. An interim order was issued in favour of the petitioner on 17.11.1997 directing the petitioner to continue and to be paid salary.
(3.) A counter affidavit has been filed, in which it is stated that appointment of petitioner has been made against a substantive vacancy by the Committee of Management. It is submitted that Committee of Management had no right to make ad hoc appointment against a substantive vacancy under Section 18 of the U.P. Secondary Education Services Commission and Selection Boards Act, 1982, inasmuch as procedure for making of such appointment had been prescribed in the First Removal of Difficulties Order, 1981, but such procedure has not been followed.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.