- (1.) In the writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 28.4.1996 by which respondent No. 3 has been appointed as a Head Master. The appointment is said to be contrary to the statutory rules known as Punjab Privately Managed Recognised Schools Employees (Security of Service) Rules, 1981.
(2.) Mr. Sharma submits that the under the aforesaid rules, it was necessary for the Management to seek the approval of he DPI. He has not been shown any material by the Management to indicate that such an approval has been given. The petitioner had served a legal notice on respondent No. 1 on 2.2.2006 seeking the relief for which prayer has been made in the present writ petition. The respondents have not taken any decision on the legal notice.
(3.) Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel, we are of the opinion that there is no merit is the writ petition.;