RAM BADAI YADAV Vs. DISTRICT INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard Shri R.C. Dwivedi, learned Counsel for Shri Ram Badai Yadav, the Petitioner-Appellant. Learned Standing Counsel appears for Respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 4. Shri T.N. Tiwari has entered appearance on behalf of Shri Govind Tiwari-Respondent No. 3. Shri Satya Prakash Gupta holding his brief has appeared in the matter

(2.) A vacancy on the post of Lecturer in Hindi in promotion quota occurred on the retirement of the then Lecturer on 30.6.1996 The Committee of Management notified the vacancy to the Secondary Education Service Commission, and proceeded to fill it up by resolution dated 17.7.1996, recommending appointment of Shri Govind Tiwari. The District Inspector of Schools approved the appointment on 31.12.1997. Shri Ram Badai Yadav, the next in seniority in LT grade claiming promotion on the same post of Lecturer in Hindi in promotional quota filed a Writ Petition No. 3300 of 1998 alleging that Shri Govind Tiwari did not possess the requisite qualification for promotion provided in the schedule appended to U.P. Intermediate Education Act providing for MA degree in Hindi as essential qualification, with 5 years continuous service as such, on the date of occurrence of vacancy on 1.7.1996 under Rule 16 of the U.P. Secondary Education Service Condition Rules, 1995.

(3.) Learned Single Judge found that the result of Shri Govind Tiwari-Respondent No. 3 of MA examination in Hindi was declared on 14.7.1996. He was recommended by the resolution of the Committee of Management for appointment by promotion on 17.7.1996. Relying upon Sangam Lal Pandey v. State of U.P. and Ors.,1990 1 UPLBEC 706 it was held that the result will relate back to the date on which Shri Govind Tiwari appeared in the examination. He possessed necessary qualification on the date of vacancy, and was thus qualified and eligible for the post. The findings recorded by the learned Single Judge are quoted as below