R.P. Singh, J. - (1.) By means of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has prayed for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to pay salary and other allowances to the petitioner from 18-8-86 onwards and to permit the petitioner to join as Principal of the college.
(2.) Briefly, the petitioner's case, as averred in the writ petition, is that the petitioner was selected by the U.P. Secondary Education Service Commission, Allahabad as Principal of Laxmi Narain Uchchattar Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Bhawa, Kerakat, district Jaunpur and when the Management in spite of the repeated attempts of the petitioner and the letter sent by the D.I.O.S. and the Deputy Director of Education failed to appoint the petitioner as Principal, the petitioner approached the Deputy Director of Education who on receipt of an application of the petitioner that the Management failed to appoint him as a principal, passed an order on 11-6-86 under Section 17 (2) directing the respondent No. 2, the Committee of Management to appoint the petitioner as Principal and hand over the charge of Principal on 18-6-86 and pay him the salary and emoluments due. The petitioner's case is that in spite of this order passed by the Deputy Director of Education, the respondent No. 2 has still not allowed him to join as Principal or pay him the salary due and hence this writ petition.
(3.) We have heard the learned standing Counsel who appears for respondent No. 1 and Sri Tripathi, learned Counsel for respondent No. 2. The learned Counsel for the respondent No. 2 contended that the Committee of Management did issue an order of appointment in favour of the petitioner and wrote to the D.I.O.S. and Deputy Director of Education also informing them of the same but the petitioner himself did not join the institution as he was employed elsewhere which he found to be more lucrative, Our attention has been drawn to the letter written by D.I.O.S. to the Deputy Director of Education on 24-10-86 wherein the D.I.O.S. wrote that in spite of the order passed on 11-6-86 directing him to join the institution on 18-6-86, the petitioner did not join the same even though a copy of the order had been sent to him by registered post on 12-6-86. Instead the petitioner had come to his office on 18-6-86 and did not join the institution. Again, our attention has been drawn to another letter sent by the D.I. O.S. to the Deputy Director of Education on 6th December, 1986 that the petitioner had not joined the office of the Principal of the college and sought the direction of the Deputy Director of Education as to what should be done now in this connection. In reply to these letters sent by the D.I.O.S., the Deputy Director of Education vide his letter dated 27th December, 1986 wrote to the D.I.O.S. that since the petitioner had not joined the institution as Principal and hence the D.I.O.S. should make fresh arrangements in this connection.;