Rakesh Tiwari, J. - (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.
(2.) THIS writ petition has been filed by the petitioners challenging the validity and correctness of the order dated 31.7.2008 passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Kaushambi which has been appended as Annexure -1 to the writ petition. By this order the DIOS, Kaushambi has directed that respondent No. 5, Sri Rashid Ahmad Khan who was working as ad -hoc lecturer in the college in question be appointed as Principal pursuant to selection by way of direct recruitment in pursuance to advertisement No. 1 of 2002. The backdrop of the case is that one Sri Kanhai Ram working as lecturer in the college expired on 26.11.85 causing a vacancy. The DIOS accorded ad -hoc approval to the appointment of respondent No. 5 Rashid Ahmad Khan as Principal of the college w.e.f. 20.5.1993. Petitioner No. 3 namely, Sri Radhey Shyam claims that he has been appointed in the college as officiating/ad hoc Principal in the year 2000 whereas respondent No. 5 applied for the post of Principal pursuant to the advertisement No. 1 of 2002 in the year 2002 and was selected thereafter.
(3.) THE contention of learned Counsel for the petitioners is that respondent No. 5 was not eligible for consideration of the post of Principal as he was not a permanent lecturer and that the Committee of Management had not forwarded his name to the Selection Board under Chapter II Regulation 6 of the Regulations framed under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act. Chapter II Regulation 6 of the Regulations provides that the post of Principal is to be filled up by a permanent lecturer and not by ad hoc lecturer.;