- (1.) This writ application is filed by the petitioner for regularisation of his engagement in Shyamaprosad Nagar High School (Higher Secondary), P.O. Nimta, Kolkata in the post of non-teaching staff (group-D). The petitioner was engaged in the post of non-teaching staff (group-D) on the basis of resolution adopted in the meeting of the managing committee in the school under reference on August 19, 2008.
(2.) After considering the facts and circumstances of this case I find that the procedure for appointment of non-teaching staff of a nongovernment aided school was guided by the provisions of Rule 28(1)(ii) of the Management Rules, 1969. Under the above provisions prior approval of the District Inspector of Schools concerned was necessary for initiating selection process against an approved vacancy. Thereafter the panel of the selected candidates should have been approved by the District Inspector of Schools concerned. A selected candidate could only be appointed as a non-teaching staff of a non-government aided higher secondary school from the approved panel. No material is brought on record to show that the above selection process adhering to the Recruitment Rules in force was valid in case of engagement of the petitioner.
(3.) The law is well settled as decided in the matter of Dr. Arundhati Ajit Pargaonkar v. Union of India & Ors., 1995 AIR(SC) 962 And the relevant portions of the above decision are set out below: "Since the Government has been treating the Class II post in purview of Public Service Commission and these posts were not included in the notification issued on 8th October, 1965 by the State Government the Tribunal did not commit any error in recording the finding that the post of Lecturer in Dentistry in the State of Maharashtra even in 1978 was within purview of the Public Service Commission. Even otherwise the Temporary Government Service Regularisation Rules issued by the Government in 1975 should not be held, in the larger interest to be applicable to those cases where the post specially Class-11 service is in purview of the Public Service Commission. In Dr. M.A. Haque v. Union of India, 1993 AIR(SCW) 784 it was observed by this Court: "........we cannot lose sight of the fact that the recruitment rules made under Article 309 of the Constitution have to be followed strictly and not in breach. If a disregard of the rules and the bypassing of the Public Service Commissions are permitted, it will open a back- door for illegal recruitment without limit. In fact this Court has, of late, been witnessing a constant violation of the recruitment rules and a scant respect for the constitutional provisions requiring recruitment to the services through the Public Service Commission. It appears that since this Court has in some cases permitted regularisation of the irregularly recruited employees, some Government and authorities have been increasingly resorting to irregular recruitments. The result has been that the recruitment rules and the Public Service Commissions have been kept on cold storage and candidate dictated by various considerations are being recruited as a matter of course. The claim of the appellate therefore that she stood regularised under 1975 Resolution cannot be accepted.";