S.K. Phaujdar, J. - (1.) THROUGH this writ petition, the Petitioner desired that a direction upon the Respondents be given to issue appointment letter to him and as the selection committee had already selected him and as the same was approved by the Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Varanasi. Further directions were sought to command Respondent Nos. 3 and 5 to permit the Petitioner to join the post of an assistant teacher in CT. grade in their institution and to pay him salary, according to law.
(2.) IT was the case of the Petitioner that the institution in question, namely, Chintamani Rai Madhyamic Vidyalaya was a registered society and the institution run by it is also named Chintamani Madhyamic Vidyalaya, for imparting High School Education. The Petitioner claims that he was qualified and eligible for being appointed to the post of a CT. grade teacher and a post of an assistant teacher in CT. grade was created in September, 1986. The post was advertised. Several persons including the Petitioner responded and a selection committee was duly constituted comprising of the Manager, Principal and a representative of the Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari. The Petitioner was called for an interview on 16.9.1986 and he had appeared before the selection committee but the date of interview was postponed to 12.1.1987, when again the Petitioner appeared before the selection committee. He was selected by the selection committee and was informed by a letter dated 30.1.1987 indicating that his name was recommended for appointment against the post of an assistant teacher in C. T. grade and the recommendation was approved by the Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari, who had issued a direction to the Manager of the institution to issue appointment letter in favour of the Petitioner on probation for one year for the post of assistant teacher C.T. grade in the pay scale of Rs. 470 -720. The Petitioner had gone to the institution on 31.3.1987 and again on 1.2.1987 and he was assured by the Manager and the Principal that appointment letter would be sent to him through post. But no such appointment letter was issued rather a sum of Rs. 20,000 was demanded from him for issuance of the letter. The Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari was approached and an F.I.R. was lodged at the concerned police station. The Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari sent a registered letter to the Manager directing issuance of the appointment letter within three days. The Petitioner also filed an injunction suit against the Manager and the Principal to restrain them from their illegal action and omission but on assurance by the Manager that the appointment letter would be given only after withdrawal of the suit, the Petitioner withdrew the suit. The Manager then demanded certificates and marksheets from the Petitioner and same were submitted to him. He was also forced, under the hope of the appointment, to execute a letter that the allegations in the F.I.R. made by him were not true. He also moved the D.I.O.S. but could not get the desired result. The application was presented on 8.8.1988 and was finally admitted on 23.11.1988 and an interim order was recorded. The Respondent Nos. 3 and 5 were directed through an interim mandamus to issue letter of appointment to the Petitioner within six weeks from the date of service of a copy of the order or to show cause by a counter -affidavit within the same period. This order was reiterated on 17.9.1991 as till that date neither the appointment letter was issued nor any counter -affidavit was filed. It appears from the record that an appearance was made by Respondent Nos. 3 and 5 who had appealed for recall of the order dated 17.9.1991. Shri Ajay Kumar Dwivedi filed the application on their behalf.
(3.) A counter -affidavit was filed by the Principal of the institution. It was asserted by him that four posts of C.T. grade teachers were created in the institution in 1986 in addition to the already existing six posts of teachers including the Principal. The five teachers already existing were confirmed teachers in the C.T. grade of these five teachers none was of the Scheduled Caste. Accordingly, when four new posts were occurred one was to be filled in by a candidate belonging to the Scheduled Caste. In the advertisement, however, due to inadvertence, it was not mentioned that out of four newly created posts one was reserved for candidates of the Scheduled Caste. Accordingly, no candidate of the Scheduled Caste could apply against such vacancy. The Petitioner and three others were selected for appointment, but the Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari approved the selection only against three posts and accorded no approval to the appointment of the Petitioner who was selected for the fourth post. Some query was made from the Assistant Director of Education (Basic), Vth Region, Varanasi, and the Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari by his letter dated 23.1.1987 informed the Manager of the institution that instructions with regard to the fourth post would be given to him later. A copy of this letter dated 23.1.1987 was annexed as C.A. 2. The advertisement in question was annexed as C.A. 1. It was further stated in the counter -affidavit that the Assistant Director of Education (Basic) by his letter dated 29/31.1.1987 directed the Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari to re -advertise the post for the Scheduled Caste candidates. This letter was appended as Annexure C.A. 3. It appears that the Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari instead of compliance of the direction given by the Assistant Director of Education, accorded approval to the illegal selection of the Petitioner. The Petitioner was not given an appointment as his selection was illegal and void as he was not a candidate of the Scheduled Caste. At no point of time, the Petitioner was assured of any appointment by the Manager or the Principal. The demand of illegal gratification was also a false allegation. It was also denied that the Petitioner was forced/induced to withdraw his suit or F.I.R.;