S.R. Singh, J. - (1.) Heard and perused the writ petition.
(2.) The ad-hoc appointment of teachers in short term vacancy is still governed by the provisions contained in the U.P. Secondary Education Services Commission (Removal of Difficulties) (Second order) 1981. The ban imposed by the Government on appointment of teachers has no application to appointment by direct recruitment or promotion to a short term vacancy. In such matters District Inspector of Schools is to examine whether the alleged appointment has been made in a short term vacancy as alleged by individual teacher and if so whether such appointment had been made in accordance with the provisions contained in the Removal of Difficulties order aforesaid. It may be pertinent to observe that appointment by direct recruitment in short term vacancy is now to be made after due advertisement in Newspapers of wide circulation. The appointments by direct recruitment prior to the decision of the court in the case of K.N. Dwivedi followed in Radha Raizada 1995 (25) ALR 383 , by notifying the vacancies on notice board was permissible as held by Division Bench of this Court in the case Ashika Prasad Shukla, 1998 U.P.L.B.E.C. 1722 . After the decision of K.N. Dwivedi and Radha Raizada, 1995 (25) ALR 383 , the appointment by direct recruitment in short term vacancy can not be made except after advertising the vacancy in newspaper of wide circulation. It may also be pertinent to observe that any appointment by direct recruitment or promotion in a short term vacancy will automatically cease upon the short term vacancy being converted in the substantive vacancy. The matter, therefore, needs to be re-considered.
(3.) Accordingly the writ petition succeeds and allowed. The District Inspector of Schools is directed to reconsider the matter and take appropriate decision thereon in accordance with law with the direction made in this judgment within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Petition Allowed. ;