SAMAPIKA CHATTERJEE Vs. REGIONAL INSPECTRESS OF GIRLS SCHOOLS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON the basis of a communication dated 4th October, 1974, issued by the Director of Education (Secondary), the Regional Inspectress of Girls Schools, Allahabad, has passed the order dated 23rd March, 1987 that the petitioner, a lady teacher in the Primary Section of an Intermediate Girls College, is not entitled to receive the salary and other emoluments as a teacher in the C. T. Grade. The legality of the aforesaid communication of the Director of Education (Secondary) and the aforesaid order of the Regional Inspectress is being questioned in the present writ petition

(2.) THE Standing Counsel represents the Regional Inspectress and the State of U. P., who are cited as the respondents no 1 and 3 to the writ petition. A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Regional Inspectress as well as the State of U. P. by one Sri A. P. Singh, a Camp Clerk, in the office of the Regional Inspectress. A rejoinder-affidavit has been filed to this affidavit on behalf of the petitioner. THE petition is ripe for hearing. It has not been formally admitted as yet. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties we are disposing of the same finally.

(3.) IN Commissioner, Lucknow Division v. Km. Prem Lata Misra, AIR 1977 SC 334 (decided on 26th October, 1976) the Supreme Court reversed the decision of this Court in Prem Lata's case (supra) and held that the basic section of a school was not a part of a recognised institution. Their Lordships disagreed with the view of this Court that the basic section is an integral part of the institution and, therefore, must be governed by the provisions of the Act. Their Lordships also held that a school by extending its operation to fields beyond that covered by the Act cannot extend the ambit of the matter to include in its sweep new fields of education which were outside its scope. It may be noted that their Lordships interpreted the definitions of "INstitution" and "Recognised" as they stood prior to the enforcement of U. P. Act 26 of 1975. It appears that their Lordships' attention was not invited to the changed definition of "INstitution". It also appears that their Lordships' attention was not invited to the newly added Chapter II of the Regulations as substituted by the notification dated 7th July, 1976.