- (1.) D. K. Seth, J. The petitioner was ap pointed in short terms leave vacancy on 3. 1. 1995, pursuant to which he had joined on 4-1-1995. The letter of appointment and the report of joining are Annexures-1 and 2 respectively. The appointment of the petitioner in the short terms vacancy was approved by the District Inspector of Schools, Maharajganj from time to time which are Annexures-3, 4, 5 and 6 respec tively. The appointment was made in the place of one Sri Rama Nand Pandey who went on leave without pay. By an order dated 9-10-1996 which is Annexure-8 to the writ petition as translated at the Bar, it ap pears that from reliable source it was learnt that the said Sri Ramanand Pandey had been working in the office of the District Inspector of Schools, Gorakhpur and had been drawing his salary thereand the en quiry with regard thereto has been made to the District Inspector of Schools, Gorakh pur, but no information had been forthcom ing from him. Until such report comes the petitioner's payment of salary was directed to be stopped. The petitioner made a repre sentation on 11th October, 1996, (An- nexure-9 to the writ petition ). On the other hand by an order dated 5-11-1996 (Annexure-10 to the writ petition) addressed to the manager of the school, the District In spector of Schools has asked for requisition from the school for appointment in the vacancy resulted on account of the tendering of resignation by the said Sri Rama Nand Pandey. In the said letter as translated at Bar it has been alleged that the said Sri Rama Nand Pandey had been receiving salary in the office of the District Inspector of Schools, Gorakhpur since 1994, though he was on leave without pay from the said school in the post of Assistant Teacher.
(2.) IN July 1996, the said Sri Rama Nand Pandey had submitted his resignation. Con cealing the said fact the petitioner was ap pointed in the place of the said Sri Rama nand Pandey. The appointment of the petit ioner was continued even after submission of the resignation of Ramanand Pandey. Concealing the fact of such resignation the extension of approval of appointment of the petitioner was obtained on 23- 7-96, upon showing the vacancy to be a short term leave vacancy. Therefore, the manager was asked to submit his explanation by 26. 7. 96, at the same time the respondent has asked to send requisition on account of such vacancy, The learned counsel for the petition contends that the petitioner was in no way concerned or connected with the alleged suppression. It is not known to the petitioner as to whether any information was available to the school authority that the said Sri Ramanand Pandey was working elsewhere or not. In any event, he is in no way concerned with the same. He contends further that there was no scope for petitioner's knowledge about the resigna tion of Sri Ramanand Pandey. How the ex tension was sought for is the business of the school authority. The petitioner has no knowledge about the same. Therefore, he cannot suffer on account of the irregularity on the part of the school authority. He con tends further that since he has been ap pointed immediately after the said Sri Rama Nand Pandey had gone on leave, there has no question of his initial appointment being irregular or illegal. He relies on the decision of the case of Km. Meena Singh v. District Inspector of Schools, Jaunpur reported in 1994 (3) UPLBEC 1653, in support of his contention that even if the leave vacancy is converted into a regular vacancy, the respondent cannot replace the petitioner an ad hoc appointee by another ad hoc appoin tee. By reason of the ratio decided in the said case the ad-hoc appointment so made would continue till a regular selection is made by the Commission. Mr. Verma, learned standing coun sel on the other hand contends that since the appointment of the petitioner was obtained by concealment of fact collusively and the petitioner was a party to the collusion the appointment was illegal and irregular and, therefore, the order passed by the respon dents are legal and valid. The petitioner cannot obtain any benefit out of such ir regularity and illegality. According to him, therefore, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.
(3.) NOW the facts remains that though in Annexure-10 it is pointed out that the said Sri Rama Nand Pandey is receiving salary since 1994 but the specific date has not been indicated therein. Admittedly, Sri Ramanand Pandey was on leave without pay wherein the petitioner was engaged on 3-1-1995. On the records it is not available as to when the said Sri Rama Nand Pandey had gone on leave and what was the reason for his going on such leave. It is also not avail able on record as to whether the school authority was in possession of the informa tion that the said Sri Rama Nand Pandey was working in the office of the District Inspector of Schools, or not. Even if, it is assumed that the school authority had such an information in that even, unless the ser vice of the said Sri Ramanand Pandey comes to an end or a resignation is tendered by him, the vacancy continues to be a shortterm vacancy where an appointment could be made. NOW, if there is any irregularity or illegality in the appointment of the petitioner and if the petitioner is a party to the collusion, the same is a different ques tion open to be decided by the respondent if they are so advised in appropriate manner. The respondents may also proceed with the enquiry or to show-cause that has been is sued to the school authority by means of Annexure-10 to the writ petition. They will be free to proceed in accordance with law and take appropriate steps on the basis there of if already not taken. The said question is altogether dif ferent from the question of continuation of the petitioner on ad hoc appointment. Until a decision is arrived at in the said process in appropriate manner, there is no scope for dispensing with the service of the petitioner. In view of the decision of this Court in the case of Km. Meena Singh (supra) wherein it has been held that in case where during continuation of a short term vacancy a regular vacancy occurs on that basis and the short term vacancy becomes a regular vacancy, in that event, the ad hoc appointee may not be replaced by another ad hoc ap pointee. Relying on the ratio decided in the said case the petitioner's appointment can not be discontinued except otherwise on a specific finding upon an appropriate en quiry after giving him an opportunity that the petitioner was in any manner guilty in obtaining the appointment through col lusion or otherwise. Therefore, the order dated 9th October, 1996 (contained in An-nexure-8 to the writ petition ). So far as the stoppage of salary of the petitioner is con cerned, is suspended till the appropriate decision is arrived at by the respondents pursuant to the order (contained in An nexure-10 to the writ petition), The respon dents shall continue to pay salary to the petitioner so long such decision is not ar rived at. The payment of salary shall be subject to such decision as well as the selec tion for appointment made pursuant to the requisition made in compliance with the order (contained in Annexure-10) This order shall, however, not prevent the respondents from proceeding with the order contained in (Annexure-10 to the writ petition) if not already complied with in accordance with law. Necessary directions are accordingly issued. The writ petition is, thus, disposed of. There will, however, be no order as to costs.;