JAI RAM YADAV Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SHRI K.N. Tripathi, Sr. Advocate assisted by SHRI Neeraj Tripathi appears for the petitioner. Learned Standing Counsel appears for the State respondents. SHRI Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate assisted by SHRI.V.K. Singh appears for respondent No. 5. With the consent of the parties, we have finally heard the special appeal.

(2.) THE petitioner appeared in the selections for the vacant sanctioned post of Asstt. clerk in Janta Inter College, Nagra, Distt. Ballia, after the Committee of Management had requested for prior approval of the District Inspector of Schools to fill up the posts on 1.3.2008 and the District Inspector of Schools gave permission on 29.1.2008. THE vacancy on the post was advertised in daily newspapers. THE Selection Committee selected the petitioner for appointment on the post reserved for Other Backward Class person. Before the District Inspector of schools could grant approval for appointment in accordance with the scheme of appointment of Class-Ill and IV employees under Regulation 101 to 107, under Chapter III of the Regulations made under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921, the claim of the respondent No. 5 Shri Santosh Kumar Singh for compassionate appointment was considered by the Court and a direction was issued to the District Inspector of Schools to look into his grievance. He was claiming compassionate appointment on an application made by her mother, on the death of father on 24.5.2007 serving as a Lecturer in the college.

(3.) LEARNED Single Judge found that in pursuance to the directions issued by the Court the District Inspector of Schools rightly proceeded to pass the impugned order and since prior approval as required under the Regulations was not given to the appointment of petitioner-appellant, he does not have right to object to the modification of the impugned order dated 22.12.2007 by the District Inspector of Schools and the offer to appoint Shri Santosh Kumar Singh-respondent No. 5 on the vacant post of Asstt. Clerk. The writ petition was dismissed, giving rise to this intra -Court appeal under Chapter VIII Rule 5 of the Rules of the Court.