- (1.) S. U. Khan, J. The petitioners of both these writ petitions are fighting with utmost tenacity for the post of Headmistress in Braham Rishi Girls Junior High School, Etah. The role of the Management as well as of the office of Basic Shiksha Adhikari is also highly objectionable. On 19. 1. 2005 Hon'ble V. K. Shukla, passed an order in the first writ petition directing B. S. A. , Etah to be personally present along with relevant records in relation to selection and appointment of the two petitioners and one Smt. Kumkum Gupta. On the next date i. e. 9. 2. 2005 a detailed order was passed by the same Hon'ble Judge recording that irrelevant records had been produced and requisite records had not been produced. In the said order it was also observed that two letters brought on record appeared to be manufactured and Manoj Jain, a clerk in the office of B. S. A. was brother-in-law of the manager of the institution. It was also found that Saurabh Jain son of Manager and Pankaj Jain real brother of Manoj Jain were also employees in the office of B. S. A. hence possibility of manipulation could not be ruled out. Ultimately Secretary, Basic Education (U. P.) at Lucknow was directed to make inquiry in respect of misplacement of records and manner in which the selection proceedings had been conducted.
(2.) SMT. Bharti Chauhan petitioner of the first writ petition had been suspended by the Management on 21. 2. 2004. Operation of the said order was stayed in the first writ petition on 6. 10. 2004. The Secretary has filed his report, severely indicting the then B. S. A. and the other employees of the office of the B. S. A. It has been stated at the bar that the services of the previous B. S. A. have been terminated. Shri K. C. Shukla, learned counsel represents Smt. Bharti Chauhan, Shri Rahul Jain, learned counsel represents the Manager and Shri R. M. Saggi and Sri R. K. Jain, learned counsel represent Smt. Nirmala Saxena.
(3.) ADMITTEDLY, Smt. Bharti Chauhan is neither teaching nor working as Headmistress still she is receiving full salary under interim order of this Court. Learned counsel for the Management stated that about 150 letters were written to her to come and join but she was not attending the School. On the other hand according to the learned counsel for Smt. Bharti Chauhan, she wrote about 150 letters to the Management to let her join but of no avail. However, this fact is admitted that practically she is not attending the School but receiving the salary. On repeated, precise inquiry from the Court it was admitted by the learned counsel for both the parties that management was ready to let her work only as teacher while she was not willing to join except as headmistress. The dual control of private management and State Government is playing havoc with the institutions privately managed but funded by the State. The main causality of this confusion is the education (more precisely, the students ). A sizable number of teachers of such institutions in Uttar Pradesh is getting salary from the State Government without teaching. Some times genuine teachers also suffer due to high handedness of the management. There may hardly be any such privately managed and Government funded institution in Uttar Pradesh, teachers and non-teaching employees of which may not be involved in some litigation in the High Court.;