(1.) Heard Sri Samarth Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondent.
(2.) Petitioner is before this Court assailing the order impugned dated 4.11.2016 passed by the Joint Director of Education, Saharanpur Region, Saharanpur as well as consequential order dated 2.12.2016 passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Saharanpur (Annexure 10 and 11 respectively to the writ petition).
(3.) The controversy in hand relates to the institution known as Bhartiya Inter College, Talahadi Bujurg District Saharanpur (hereinafter referred to as "the institution") which is a recognised institution and is governed by the provisions of U.P. Intermediate Education Act as well as Payment of Salary Act 24 of 1971. It appears a short term vacancy arose in the institution on account of promotion of one Baleshwar Tyagi who was earlier working as L.T.Grade teacher. The said vacancy was notified in two newspapers and thereafter the Committee of Management being the competent authority proceeded to fill up the same. Consequentially, the Committee of Management had passed a resolution on 1.6.1998 appointing the petitioner on the post in question. Thereafter, the Committee of Management forwarded all the relevant papers to the District Inspector of Schools on 8.6.1998 for approval. Since no orders were passed by the District Inspector of Schools, the Committee of Management had issued an appointment letter in favour of the petitioner on 18.6.1998 in terms of the provisions of Second Removal of Difficulties Order, 1981. Pursuant thereto petitioner had joined his duties on 1.7.1998. Once no action was taken by the District Inspector of Schools, such situation, impelled the petitioner to approach this Court by means of Writ Petition No. 4528 of 1999, which was finally disposed of vide order dated 17.2.1999 directing the District Inspector of Schools to pass an appropriate order on the recommendation of the management for grant of approval to the appointment of the petitioner within two weeks from the date of presentation of the order. Pursuant thereto the District Inspector of Schools had accorded approval to the appointment of the petitioner vide order dated 20.11.1999 indicating therein that the appointment was made by the Committee of Management on 1.6.1998. In response thereof, the petitioner started getting salary and still he is getting salary continuously. Thereafter, Section 33 of the U.P.Secondary Education Service Selection Board Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") came to be amended on 18.4.2016 wherein clause-G was added providing that all the teachers appointed on a short term vacancy prior to 25.1.1999 would be considered for regularisation. Pursuant to the said amendment a circular was issued by the Director of Education on 3.6.2016. Since the appointment of the petitioner was made prior to 25.1.1999, he approached the District Inspector of Schools by making a representation requesting therein to submit his documents before the Joint Director of Education as he was the Chairman of the Committee constituted under Section 33-G of the Act. The District Inspector of Schools forwarded the same vide his letter dated 20.9.2016 clearly indicating therein that appointment of the petitioner was made pursuant to a resolution dated 1.6.1998 and thereafter papers in respect of approval was forwarded on 18.8.1998 and ultimately pursuant to the order of this Court, the approval was accorded on 20.11.1999. But the Joint Director of Education has refused to regularise the services of the petitioner by the order impugned dated 4.11.2016 precisely on the ground that the approval to the appointment of the petitioner was accorded by the District Inspector of Schools w.e.f. 20.11.1999 as such, he is not eligible for regularisation under Section 33-G of the Act. Consequentially, the District Inspector of Schools has also passed impugned consequential order dated 2.12.2016. Hence, this writ petition.