- (1.) M. Katju, J. Heard learned counsels for the parties.
(2.) THE petitioner was the Principal of Government Intermediate College, Kadaura district Jalaun. He was born on 15. 7. 1934 and his retirement age is 58 years and accordingly he retired from service on 31. 7. 92. However, the petitioner claimed benefit of the Government Order dated 21. 8. 84, true copy of which is Annexure 1 to the petition. In this Govt. Order it is men tioned that teachers of Govt. Colleges who are retiring in the middle Session, may be granted extension of service till the end of the Session provided certain conditions mentioned in the Government Order are fulfilled e. g. that the work and conduct of the teacher was satisfactory. THE petitioner also applied for extension of his service vide Annexure 2 to the petition to the District Inspector of Schools on 6. 2. 1992. However, this application was rejected by the District Inspector of Schools on 30. 7. 92, Annexure 4 to the petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that no reasons have been given in this order dated 30. 7. 92 rejecting the ap plication of the petitioner. This contention is correct. Reasons should have been as signed for rejecting the petitioner's applica tion. Hence I set aside the order dated 30. 7. 92 and remand the matter to the Dis trict Inspector of Schools Jalaun to pass fresh order in accordance with the relevant G. O. with in three months. It appears that in this case on 23. 9. 92 this court has passed an interim order directing the respondents not to interfere with the working of the petitioner till 30. 6. 93. In my humble opinion it is only for ' the authority concerned and not this Court to grant extension of service and not for this court. It is for the authority concerned i. e. the District Inspector of schools to examine whether the work and conduct of the petitioner has been satisfactory or not. However, in view of the interim order dated 23. 9. 92 the petitioner continued in service till 30. 6. 93 and i am informed that salary from 1. 3. 92 till 30. 6. 93 has been deducted from his the retirement benefit. In my opinion unless the authority concerned finds that the work and conduct of the petitioner was satisfactory he was not en titled for extension of service at all. Hence, the authority concerned shall decide the matter afresh and only if he finds that the petitioner's work and conduct was satisfac tory shall the petitioner be paid salary for that period.
(3.) WITH these observation this petition is finally disposed of. Order accordingly. .;