OM PRAKASH TRIPATHI Vs. DISTRICT BASIC SHIKSHA ADHIMARI VARANASI
LAWS(ALL)-2009-4-148
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on April 30,2009

OM PRAKASH TRIPATHI Appellant
VERSUS
DISTRICT BASIC SHIKSHA ADHIMARI VARANASI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Sudhir Agarwal, J. - (1.) LIST revised. None appears on behalf of the petitioner. However, I have perused the record. The petitioner has sought a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to pay his salary on the post of Assistant Teacher in C.T. Grade in Bal Niketan Junior High School, Varanasi appointed on ad hoc basis since 1.3.1991 and to extend the appointment of the petitioner till the regularly selected candidate joins the post. The appointment of the petitioner was for a limited period upto 20.5.1992 without following the procedure prescribed in Rule 4 to 10 of U.P. Recognised Basic Schools (Junior High Schools) Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Teachers) Rules, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as "1978 Rules"). It was approved by the District Basic Education Officer, Varanasi who also directed the institution to fill up the vacancy permanently in the meantime after advertising the post in newspaper in accordance with the provisions of 1978 Rules. However, the management instead thereof sought to appoint the petitioner on permanent basis vide order dated 5.2.1992 (Annexure 4 to the writ petition). Such appointment is ex facie illegal and contrary to the provisions of Rule 5 of 1978 Rules which reads as under: "5. Eligibility for appointment.--No person shall be appointed as Headmaster or Assistant Teacher in substantive capacity in any recognised school unless-- (a) he possesses the minimum qualifications prescribed for such post; (b) he is recommended for such appointment by the Selection Committee." The appointment of the petitioner vide letter dated 5.2.1992 on permanent basis, made by the Management is thus illegal being in the teeth of statutory rules. The appointment being wholly illegal and contrary to the statutory provisions, no relief can be granted to the petitioner. The writ petition lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.