R.R.K.Trivedi, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri K. R. Singh, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 3 and learned standing counsel for respondent No. 1. Learned counsel for the parties have agreed that this writ petition may be decided finally at this stage.
(2.) Facts giving rise to this writ petition are that Sri Ram Krishna Sachan, who was serving in the Institution known as Nonapur Intermediate College, Nonapur, district Kanpur Dehat as Head Clerk, died on 8th October, 1987. Petitioner Anoop Singh filed an application claiming appointment as Head Clerk in pursuance of the Government Order dated 23rd September, 1981. Committee of Management accepted the prayer of the petitioner and appointed him as Head Clerk on 1st February, 1988 on probation for one year from the date of Joining. Petitioner joined the post w.e.f. 1st February, 1988. The Committee of Management sent papers regarding appointment to the District Inspector of Schools, Kanpur Dehat with the covering letter dated 1st February, 1988. The District Inspector of Schools, Kanpur Dehat, however, by order dated 20th April, 1988, Annexure 5 to the writ petition, Intimated the Committee of Management that the appointment of the petitioner as Head Clerk is not in accordance with Regulation 2 (2) of the Regulations framed under Section 16G of Intermediate Education Act and hence the appointment of the petitioner as Head Clerk was rejected. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the petitioner has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that under the Government Order dated 23rd September, 1981 which has been filed as Annexure 1 to the writ petition, it has been provided that rules relating to appointment may be relaxed while making the appointment under this order. Learned counsel has also submitted that as the purpose behind the order dated 23rd September, 1981 is to provide immediate help to the family of the deceased employee, the appointment of the petitioner as Head Clerk cannot be termed in violation of the Regulation 2 (2) of the Regulations as pointed out by the respondent No. 1 in the impugned order. Learned counsel has also submitted that the petitioner Joined the post on 1st February, 1988 and since then he is serving on the post and has also been paid salary as operation of the impugned order was stayed by this Court on 17th May, 1988. Learned counsel has submitted in alternative that if the appointment of the petitioner as Head Clerk could not be made directly, at least he was entitled to be appointed as Clerk and the respondents may be directed to accept the claim of petitioner for the alternative appointment. It is submitted that after 9 years now petitioner shall be over-age and if he is deprived of the job he shall suffer irreparable hardship and his family shall be without any income.;