- (1.) RAJIV Sharma, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel as well as Sri M. M. Asthana for respondent No. 3.
(2.) BY means of the instant writ petition, the petitioner prays for a direction to the respondents to take the Institution of the petitioner, namely, Shishu Bharti Public Junior High School Jahangirabad, Bulandshahar w. e. f. 1. 12. 2006 and fur ther disburse pay and allowances every month along with arrears of pay and allowances to the petitioners, other teachers and non-teaching staff of the Institu tion in accordance with the U. P. Junior High School Payment of Salaries of Teach ers and other Employees Act, 1948. It has been stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that Institution of the petitioner, namely, Shishu Bharti Public Junior High School Jahangirabad, Bulandshaharwas established in the year 1981 and was granted permanent rec ognition vide order dated 28. 10. 1986 w. e. f. 1. 10. 1986 and since then Institution imparting education/the petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 was appointed as Assistant Teachers in accordance with the provisions of the Rules on 1. 9. 1992 and 10. 7. 1993, respectively. The State Government has issued Government Order dated 31. 8. 1992, prescribing the conditions for granting Government aid to permanently recog nized private basic schools in the State. Vide Government Order dated 7. 9. 2006, applications were invited from the Junior Institutions, which are permanently recognised upto 30. 4. 1988 but are unaided and are interested to come under the cover of grant-in-aid. In response to the said advertisement, the Institutions have submitted applications in the requisite format after fulfilling all the conditions as enumerated in the Government Order. Certain objections were raised by the Gov ernment Order dated 2. 11. 2006, to which Manager of the Institution had furnished his reply and after considering the reply, the list of one thousand institutions was published for taking the institution on grant-in-aid but the institutions, in which the petitioners were serving as Teachers were not included in the list and as such, a representation was submitted on 1. 2. 2007 and as the same was not decided, the petitioners filed a writ petition, which was numbered as writ petition No. 796 of 2007 (MS) before this Court and this Court, vide order dated 14. 2. 2007, disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the authority concerned to dispose Of the representation of petitioners within a period of six weeks from the date of service of the certified copy. In pursuance thereof, on 5. 6. 2007, a meeting was convened at the Government level in which the petitioners as well as Basic Shikshaadhikari, Bulandshahar were invited to participate in the meeting. The respondent No. 1 considered the representation as well as report of the Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Bulandshahar and found that objections raised against the Institution on 2. 11. 2006 were not correct and the institution fulfills all the requisite conditions for taking it on grant-in-aid and as such, vide letter dated 6. 7. 2007, the respondent No. 1 directed respondent No. 2 to consider the proposal of inclusion of the petitioner's institution in the list of hundred schools. It was also directed that respondent No. 2 to submit a proposal along with the list of hundred schools for grant-in-aid. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that by mistake, the institutions have been numbered as one hundred whereas in fact 1000 institutions were to be taken in grant-in-aid as per the policy of the Government.
(3.) COUNTER affidavit has been filed by the State Government controverting the contents made in the writ petition. It has been stated in the counter affidavit in paragraph-5 that the recommendation of the Nagarpalika has not been received by the State Government and as such, the Institution could not be taken on grant-in-aid and other objection is to the effect that the institution was required to sub mit its recommendation along with one thousand institutions. Rejoinder affidavit has been filed by learned counsel for the petitioner It has been stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that all the requisite condi tions are fulfilled by the Institution and further certificate issued by the Nagarpalika has also been received by the State Government, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure RA-1 to the rejoinder affidavit to which no objection has been filed till date either by Sri M. M. Asthana or learned Standing Counsel.;