ARUNA DEVI Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Vishal Tandon learned Brief Holder for the State respondents and Sri P.N. Saxena learned Senior Counsel who has appeared for the respondent No. 6.

(2.) The challenge in the present petition is to the order dated 11 April 2008 passed by the Director Education (Secondary) as also to the order of 11 September 2001 passed by the District Inspector of Schools Ghaziabad. By the first order the Director Education has proceeded to dispose of a claim as laid by the petitioners here for their continuance in the institution in question and for payment of salary pursuant to directions issued by a learned Judge on Writ Petition No. 35290 of 2001. The challenge to the order of 11 September 2001 is clearly misconceived since that order had already been quashed by the learned Judge while rendering judgment on the writ petition aforementioned. That leaves the Court only to deal with the validity of the order passed by the Director.

(3.) In the earlier round of litigation, the petitioners approached this Court by way of Writ Petition No. 35290 of 2001 challenging the orders passed by the District Inspector of Schools in terms of which he had come to hold that they had been appointed in the institution beyond the permissible and sanctioned strength and that consequently their continuance was illegal. The learned Judge allowed that writ petition on 24 September 2007 in the following terms: -