D.S. Bajpai, J. - (1.) Writ petition No 4017 of 1985 has been filed by petitioners, Ayodhya Prasad Bajpai and Rakesh Kumar Pathak, inter alia, praying for issue of a writ of certiorari to quash the impugned order dated 5-6-1985 (Annexure 10) and the order dated 11-7-1985 (Annexure 11) passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Rae-bareli (hereinafter referred to as the Inspector for brevity) by which he directed stoppage of payment of salary to the petitioners on the posts of Lecturers in Civics and Sanskrit respectively with immediate effect even though they had been appointed and their services continued as Lecturers by the Committee of Management of the College by Annexures 9 and 8 respectively dated 2nd March, 1982 on an ad hoc basis in pursuance to U.P. Secondary Education Services Commission (Removal of Difficulties) (Third) Order, 1981 by which the appointment with condition that as and when the Service Commission makes regular selection for appointment on the said posts and candidates selected reported for duty and joined the said posts, the appointments would cease to be effective.
(2.) The petitioners have asserted that by subsequent order, dated 18th July, 1985 the Inspector directed the termination of the petitioners services. The case of the petitioners is that Shiv Bhajan Lal Janhit Inter College, Raipur, district Rae-bareli (hereinafter referred as the College) is an institution recognised and is governed by the U.P. Intermediate Education Act and the Regulations framed thereunder (hereinafter referred as the Act and the Regulations respectively). The appointing authority of the petitioners under the Act is the Committee of Management which appointed them initially as Lecturers on their respective posts on 20th November, 1979. These appointments are said to have been made in substantive vacancies after due advertisement and proper selection being held as envisaged under the Act and that ever since 20th November, 1979 the petitioners have been doing teaching work and performing their duties. Their case is that although there existed three vacancies of Lecturers including the two posts held by the petitioners, yet the Committee of Management under the directions of the Inspector made appointment of the petitioners on 12-11-1979 on ad hoc basis for a period to continued till 20th May, 1980, issued to the petitioners dated 10-12-1980 (Annexures 4 and 5 respectively). The Inspector by letter dated 31st March, ' 981 accorded approval to the appointment of the petitioners up to 20th May, 1981 with the same condition as indicated herein above. This letter of approval is on record as Annexure 8 By another order it appears that recovery of salary from the petitioners for the period 1-7-1981 to 30-9-81 amounting to Rs. 2,542 was directed and the decision of the Inspector was communicated to the petitioners by the Committee of Management. The petitioners along with, one Ashok Kumar Trivedi filed Writ Petition No. 5209 of 1983 in this Court in which a writ of certiorari was prayed for to quash the directions of the Inspector about the recovery of salary as also the decision of the Committee of Management for deduction of the salary. This writ petition was initially admitted and while admitting the petition, this Court directed stay of recovery from the petitioners salary and the aforesaid writ petition was pending when the instant writ petition was filed Thereafter appointment letters were issued from time to time extending the appointment of the petitioners and the petitioners continued to be in service without break. The events subsequent thereto have been indicated herein above. Ultimately the impugned order contained in Annexure 10 directing stoppage of payment of salary to the petitioners was passed. Despite the fact that the Committee of Management pointed out to the Inspector that since the petitioners were continuously working since 1979 and they having approached the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India against the order of this Court on application for interim relief and their Special Leave Petition being still pending, the salary of the petitioners was not liable to be withheld, but no action was taken thereon The order of 11th July, 1985 referred herein above informed the Management that since some reserve pool teachers had not been appointed till then, pool teachers and they were directed to join on the posts of the petitioners. The petitioners have relied on the provisions of Paragraph 3 by which Paragraph 3 of the U.P. Secondary Education Service Commission (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 1981 has been substituted which is as follows : "3. Every appointment of an ad hoc teacher under Paragraph 2 shall cease to have effect when a candidate recommended by the Commission or the Board, as the case may be, joins the post." It is on this basis that the petitioners assert that they were entitled to continue in service till duly recommended candidates by the Commission or Board joined on the posts held by the petitioners and as no appointments had been made nor even recommendation received by the Commission or the Board, no other person was entitled to join the said post. This Court on 1-11-1985 stayed the operation of the impugned order terminating the services of the petitioners and directed the opposite parties to pay salary to them. The two reserve pool teachers sought to be appointed in their place i. e. Mata Pher Pandey and Rajendra Kumar Trivedi were directed by the Court to be impleaded by order dated 21st January, 1986. These teachers filed an application for vacation of interim order along with an application for impleadment and the same was allowed by virtue of which the opposite-parties 4 and 5, Mata Pher Pandey and Rajendra Kumar Trivedi, were allowed to do teaching work in the College and were further allowed to draw their salary. These two newly impleaded opposite-parties filed their respective counter-Affidavits and the petitioners filed their rejoinder-Affidavit thereto.
(3.) Thereafter, it appears that the Committee of Management of the College filed Writ Petition No. 5560 of 1985 impleading Mata Pher Pandey and Rajendra Kumar Trivedi, opposite-parties 4 and 5 respectively, in the aforementioned writ petition as opposite-parties 2 and 3 and the petitioners therein Ayodhya Prasad Bajpai and Ashok Kumar Pathak in the aforesaid writ petition as opposite-parties 5 and 6 respectively praying for issue of a writ of certiorari to quash the impugned orders dated 25-9-1985, 27-9-1985 and 5-6-1985 contained in Annexures 12, 13 and 7 respectively to the said writ petition with a further prayer that the opposite-party No 1, the Inspector, be directed not to thrust the services of the opposite-parties 2 and 3 on the institution and also from making payment of salary to these opposite-parties with a farther direction that the opposite-parties 5 and 6 i. e. petitioners in Writ Petition No. 4017 of 1985 be directed to receive their salary regularly.;