A.N. Verma, Braja Nath Misra, J. - (1.) The petition involves a question as regards the inter se seniority of the petitioner and the respondent No. 3, Sri Hari Shanker Misra, as lecturers in the Murari Intermediate College, Gorakhpur
(2.) The petitioner, is aggrieved by an order passed by the District Inspector of Schools on April 3, 1981 a true copy whereof is Annexure C A-7 filed along with the counter-affidavit of respondent No. 3. The order has been passed by the District Inspector of Schools whereby he has purported to determine upon an appeal filed by respondent No. 3 against the list finalized by the management indicating the inter se seniority of the teachers of that institution in the lecturer's grade. According to the District Inspector of Schools the respondent No. 3 should have been shown as senior to the petitioner. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has vehemently attacked the impugned order on merits. He submitted that on the facts which were established on record, the decision of the District Inspector of Schools holding the respondent No. 3 to the senior to the petitioner is manifestly unsustainable. He further submits that the findings of the District Inspector of Schools are based on material which is the product for forgery, etc. We however, do not propose to enter into the merits of the claim of the petitioner that he is senior to the respondent No. 3 nor of the various findings recorded by the District Inspector of Schools on the issue. The petition is entitled to succeed, in our opinion, on the short to the petitioner. As mentioned above, the order has been passed upon an appeal filed by respondent No. 3 against the seniority list prepared by the Management some time in 1976. On this appeal to petitioner was given no notice nor was the petitioner invited to submit his reversion of facts before the District Inspector of Schools at any stage. It is indisputable that by the proposed order the rights of the petitioner were going to be seriously affected. His seniority fixed in 1976 was likely to be disturbed if the appeal filed by the respondent No. 3 were to succeed. The petitioner was hence clearly entitled in consonance with the principles of natural justice to a notice or opportunity to contest the claim of the respondent No. 3. The impugned order is, therefore, liable to be struck down on this very ground.
(3.) In the result, the petition succeeds and is allowed. The orders dated 3-4-1981 and 9-6-1981 passed by the District Inspector of Schools are quashed. The District Inspector of Schools shall now dispose of the appeal filed by respondent No. 3 in accordance with law after giving opportunity to the concerned parties of being heard in the matter.;