K. K. Birla, J. - (1.) -This writ petition has been preferred by Sri Chandra Bali Singh, Lecturer, Jawahar Lal Nehru Intermediate College Sarsawan Allahabad (hereinafter referred as the institution) for quashing the order dated 23-12-80 of the District Inspector of Schools, Allahabad (hereinafter referred as Inspector) (Annexure-VII to the writ petition) allowing selection grade to Sri Ram Naresh Lal, respondent No. 3, Lecturer in the institution and also for issue of an order fixing the petitioner senior to the respondent No. 3 and award him selection grade.
(2.) IN brief the petitioner was selected and appointed as Lecturer in English in the institution on 16-7-66 in pursuance of the interview dated 10-7-66. He joined in the institution on the same date namely 16-7-66. Sri Ram Naresh Lal, respondent No. 3 was appointed in L.T. grade on 5-8-61 and was serving in the institution since then. According to the petitioner Sri Ram Naresh Lal was appointed as Lecturer in Economics on 18-4-66 on temporary measure for one year, while he was appointed on substantive basis. Respondent No. 3 was promoted to the post of Lecturer in Geography on 15-7-67 on the substantive post and his promotion was approved by the INspector (vide its letter dated 27-12-67). According to the petitioner he was confirmed on 16-7-67, while respondent No. 3 on 15-7-68 and he is senior to the respondant No. 3. At the time of the ,'grant of the selection grade the controversy regarding seniority arose. The stand of the institution was that respondent No. 3 was working continuously as Lecturer since 8-7-66 and as such he was senior to the petitioner (Annexure-V to the writ petition). A representation was made by the petitioner to the INspector against this stand of the institution. The District INspector of Schools has by the impugned order treated respondent No. 3 senior to the petitioner and has been made entitled to the selection grade. Being aggrieved by this order Sri Chandra Bali Singh, petitioner has filed this petition. The affidavit, counter affidavit, rejoinder affidavit, supplementary counter affidavit and supplementary rejoinder affidavit have been exchanged between the parties. The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the respondent No. 3 had been promoted, and under the regulations in force at that time, before a teacher in L.T grade could have been promoted to the post of Lecturer he should have been in 5 years continuous service, that in the instant case this period expired on 5-8-66 as such the respondent No. 3 was not eligible for promotion in July 1966 and, therefore, he could have not been promoted on 8-7-66.
(3.) ANNEXURE-III to the counter affidavit is a letter dated 16-8-66 written by the Inspector according approval of the appointment of the teachers on the initial salary of the scale shown against each from the date of their taking over charge in the institution. In this letter Sri Ram Naresh Lal at serial No. 1 and Sri Chandra Bali Singh at serial No. 2 have been shown on probation. The contention on behalf of the respondent No. 3 is that he is also a direct appointee, that he was already working as Lecturer in the institution, that approval of appointment of both was accorded by the Inspector on the same date, that he is older than Chandra Bali Singh in age and, therefore, under law in any case he is senior to the petitioner. It was also contended that even if his appointment is taken on promotion, for these reasons he is senior to the petitioner and the impugned order is proper. It was further contended that he was being treated senior all along but no objection was raised by the petitioner and he has been rightly held to be entitled to the senior grade. The learned counsel for the parties have addressed us at length in support of their respective contentions.;