Sudhir Agarwal, J. - (1.) A Division Bench, noticing conflict in Division Bench judgments in Surendra Kumar Srivastava vs. State of U.P. and others, 2007 1 ESC 118 (All.)(DB); Raj Kumar Verma and others vs. District Inspector of Schools, Saharanpur and others, 1999 2 UPLBEC 1420; District Inspector of Schools, Kanpur Nagar and others vs. Diwakar Lal and others, 2000 3 ESC 1670(All.); Smt. Shashi Saxena and others vs. Deputy Director of Education and others, 2000 3 ESC 1990 (All.); Raghuvendra Babu Misra vs. District Inspector of Schools, Etah and others, 2002 3 ESC 68 and also that the Full Bench in Smt. Pramila Mishra vs. Deputy Director of Education, Jhansi Division, Jhansi and others, 1997 2 UPLBEC 1329 has not considered legislative intent reflected by insertion of Section 33-B in U.P. Secondary Education Services Selection Boards Act, 1982 (hereinafter referred to as "Act, 1982"), vide order dated 11.09.2018, referred following questions to be answered by a Larger Bench: "(a) Whether an ad-hoc appointee, appointed against a short term vacancy, would automatically cease to be in employment upon conversion of the vacancy into a substantive vacancy? (b) Whether the ad-hoc appointee against a short term vacancy is entitled to continue to serve, even though the vacancy is converted into a substantive vacancy, until appointment of either an ad-hoc teacher in accordance with the provisions of the U.P. Secondary Education Services Commission (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 1981 or till appointment of a regularly selected teacher recommended by the Commission/ Board, whichever is earlier? (c) Whether the benefit of regularization as provided under Section 33-B of the UP Act No.5 of 1982 is available only where the short term vacancy gets converted into a substantive vacancy after the commencement of U.P. Act No.1 of 1993 i.e. 7.8.1993 and not before? (d) Whether the Full Bench decision in the case of Smt. Pramila Mishra (supra) lays down correct law as it fails to consider the legislative intent reflected by the insertion of Section 33-B in UP Act No.5 of 1982?"
(2.) Reference was made in Special Appeal No. 280 of 2013 (Jahaj Pal vs. District Inspector of Schools and Another) and subsequently, Special Appeals No. 28 of 2006; 34(D) of 2006, 252 of 2017; 717 of 2009; 858 of 2013 and Writ Petition No. 19243 of 1999, wherein, also similar questions were raised, have been connected with above appeal.
(3.) We find it appropriate to refer a brief factual matrix of all the aforesaid appeals and writ petition so that questions referred to this Bench may be appreciated and answered effectively and accurately. Special Appeal No. 280 of 2013;