- (1.) SUDHIR Narain, J. These two peti tions involve common questions of law and fact and are being disposed of together.
(2.) THE facts in brief are that Girdhar Prasad Saxena was Lecturer in English in Shri Mahaveer Digamber Jain Inter Col lege, Sirsaganj, Mainpuri (hereinafter referred to as the Institution ). He sub mitted his resignation to the Committee of Management on 22-2-1977 which was ac cepted by the Committee of Management of the Institution and acceptance was com municated by the Management of the In stitution by its letter dated 1-3-1977 to Sri Saxena. Sri Saxena filed suit No. 75 of 1977 in the Court of Munsif Shikohabad disput ing the validity and authenticity of the resignation letter tendered by him. THE suit was dismissed by the trial Court on 15-12-1979. He filed Civil Appeal No. 68 of 1980 against the judgment of the trial Court. In the appeal, however, the Court did not grant any interim injunction order. THE Committee of Management resolved to fill up the vacancy. On 12-1-1980 it appointed Narendra Pratap Singh, respondent No. 2 as Lecturer for six months. THE District Inspector of Schools, Mainpuri by his order dated 30th March, 1980 approved his appointment for the period 15-1-1980 to 20-5-1980. By this order it was further provided that in case the said vacancy was necessary to be filled up for any period beyond 20-5-1980 then the same shall be filled up after conducting selection proceedings in accordance with the provisions of U. P. Intermediate Education Act and the Regulations framed thereunder. The Selection Committee took a decision to fill up the post of Lecturer by making selection as directed by the Dis trict Inspector of Schools by his order dated 30th March, 1980. It advertised the post. One application was submitted by Sri Subhash Chandra and another by Sri Narendra Pratap Singh, respondent No. 2. The selection was fixed for 10-6-1980. However, the selection could not be held on that date as the expert was not avail able. It was adjourned and ultimately the selection took place on 27-6-1980. The Selection Committee recommended the name of respondent No. 2 for appoint ment. In pursuance of the aforesaid recommendation of the Selection Com mittee a resolution was passed by the Committee of Management on 3-7-1980 for appointing respondent No. 2 on tem porary basis subject to the decision of the Court. The Manager issued appointment letter on 4-7-1980 in pursuance of the aforesaid resolution indicating that the appointment of the petitioner was tem porary. The Committee of Management forwarded the papers to the District In spector of Schools for according approval. The District Inspector of Schools vide his order dated 23-3-1980 approved the ap pointment of respondent No. 2 on tem porary basis till the decision of the Court. Civil Appeal No. 68 of 1980 filed by Sri Girdhar Prasad Saxena was dismissed on 23-9-1982 by IIIrd Additional District Judge, Mainpuri. He filed second appeal No. 270 of 1983 in this Court. The second appeal was dismissed on 1-12-1983.
(3.) AFTER the expiry of three months from the date of dismissal of the Civil Appeal by the IIIrd Additional District Judge, Mainpuri, the Manager of the In stitution wrote a letter on 3-1-1983 to the District Inspector of Schools, Mainpuri informing him that the appeal preferred by Sri Saxena has been dismissed with the result the substantive vacancy on the post of English Lecturer in the Institution is to be filled up. On 20-10-1983, the District Inspector of Schools, Mainpuri wrote a letter to the Manager that the approval of the appointment of respondent No. 2 was till the decision of the appeal and after this period the approval will become ineffec tive. It asked the Manager to intimate as to what steps have been taken in the matter. The Committee of Management, there after passed a resolution on 11- 12- 1983 that a notice of termination of service be given to respondent No. 2 and in his place Dhyan Singh Yadav, petitioner No. 2 be promoted. In pursuance of this resolution a notice of termination of service was given to respondent No. 2 on 16-12-1983 and Dhyan Singh Yadav, petitioner No. 2, was promoted on ad hoc basis as Lecturer in English on 19-12-1983. The papers were forwarded to the District Inspector of Schools intimating about the service of respondent No. 2 and promotion of petitioner No. 2 to the post of Lecturer from the post of Assistant Teacher in L. T grade. The District Inspector of Schools disapproved the order of termination vide his order dated 29-12-1983 on the ground that the order of termination was ineffec tive without obtaining prior permission of the U. P, Secondary Education Services Commission. The Management submitted representation to the District Inspector of Schools. The District Inspector of Schools vide order dated 25-2-1984 disapproved the appointment of petitioner No. 2 by way of promotion to the post of Lecturer. The Committee of Management and Dhyan Singh Yadav filed writ petition No. 3517 of 1984 against these orders. The Committee of Management forwarded the papers for approval of appointment of Dhyan Singh Yadav by way of promotion to the U. P. Secondary Education Services Commission (hereinafter referred to as the Commission ). The Commission has disapproved the promotion of Dhyan Singh Yadav vide his order dated 8-7-1988. Dhyan Singh Yadav has challenged this order by filing writ petition No. 18183 of 1988. The basic question is whether the appointment of Narendra Pratap Singh was for a fixed term or it should be taken as temporary appointment.;