ANAND KUMAR Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE facts giving rise to this petition are that the petitioner's father worked as a Class IV employee in Diggvijay Nath Inter College, Chowk Bazar, District Mahrajganj, which is a duly recognized and Government aided Institution, governed by the provisions of U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 and the regulations framed thereunder. Petitioner's father died in harness on 18.1.2006. THE petitioner, who held requisite qualification for being appointed as an Assistant Teacher, moved an application before the Principal and the Committee of Management of the Institution, as also the District Inspector of Schools, Mahrajganj thereby seeking appointment on compassionate ground. THE Principal of the college forwarded the necessary papers to the District Inspector of Schools, Mahrajganj. However, when no action was taken, the petitioner was constrained to file a Writ Petition No. 60908 of 2006 before this Court, which was disposed of by order dated 15.12.2006 thereby directing the District Inspector of Schools to look into the matter and to take necessary decision within a specified period. In pursuance of the direction given by this Court, the District Inspector of Schools vide his order dated 23.12.2006 found the petitioner to be entitled to appointment on compassionate ground and thereby directed the management of the college to forward the proposal for appointment of the petitioner on a post suitable to his qualification so that appointment could be made after recommendation of the selection committee. THEreafter, the matter pertaining to the appointment of the petitioner on compassionate ground was placed before the selection committee, which recommended that the petitioner should be appointed as Assistant Clerk, which post was lying vacant in the Institution. THE District Inspector of Schools vide his letter dated 12.2.2007 communicated the decision of the selection committee to the Manager/Principal of the college and directed the management to complete the formalities relating to appointment. THE direction as contained in the letter dated 12.2.2007 is being quoted hereinunder: <IMG>JUDGEMENT_286_ADJ1_2012Image1.jpg</IMG>

(2.) THE aforesaid direction of the District Inspector of Schools was not complied with. Neither any letter of appointment was issued nor the petitioner was permitted to join his duties. Accordingly, on 8.3.2007, the petitioner submitted a representation to the District Inspector of Schools, Maharajganj, for suitable direction to the Manager/Principal of the institution to permit him to join the duty as an Assistant Clerk of the Institution. In the meantime, the Committee of Management passed a resolution on 17.12.2006 thereby proposing to appoint the petitioner on Class IV post instead on the post of Assistant Clerk, which is a class III post. However, the District Inspector of Schools, Maharajganj by his order dated 21.3.2007 rejected the resolution of the management seeking to appoint the petitioner on a Class IV post and directed the Manager to appoint the petitioner, as per the recommendation of the Selection Committee, on the post of Assistant Clerk. Despite specific direction by the District Inspector of Schools, the Manager did not appoint the petitioner. THEreafter, the District Inspector of Schools instead of taking action against a recalcitrant management repeated its directions vide letters dated 5.5.2007 and 22.5.2007, but to no effect. THE stubborn attitude of the management was to such an extent that vide letter dated 19.6.2007 it informed the District Inspector of Schools that they held their own enquiry, and took interview of the petitioner, and found him suitable for appointment on a Class IV post, therefore, their proposal to appoint the petitioner on Class IV post be approved.

(3.) WHEN this case was taken up on 29.11.2011, even in the revised call of the list, no one appeared to oppose the petition. In the aforesaid background I have no option but to accept the facts stated in the writ petition as correct.