PREM PRAKASH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Prabhat Singh, Advocate for the Petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2, Sri V.K. Upadhyay holding brief on behalf of Sri S.K. Singh, learned Counsel appearing for Respondent No. 5 and perused the record.

(2.) By means of the impugned order dated 7.4.2007 the District Inspector of Schools, Chandauli has held Respondent No. 5 senior to Petitioner on the ground that on the date of appointment of Petitioner he was minor hence his appointment was not valid and, therefore, for the purpose of seniority Petitioner cannot be treated senior to Respondent No. 5. It is, however, not in dispute that the Petitioner's appointment has not been revoked by District Inspector of Schools and still the Petitioner is working.

(3.) It is not disputed that the date of birth of Petitioner is 5.6.1956 and he was engaged as Class-IV employee on 1.7.1972 on a fixed pay of Rs. 25/- per month. At that time the institution concerned was not in grant-in-aid. It was brought in grant-in-aid on 1.7.1974 and for the purpose of payment of salary from the State Exchequer the Petitioner's regular appointment was treated from 1.7.1974 and he was paid salary accordingly.