SAVITRI KHANNA Vs. REGIONAL INSPECTRESS OF GIRLS SCHOOLS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE short controversy which required consideration in the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is with regard to the claim of the petitioner for appointment on ad hoc basis in accordance with the provisions of Section 18(b) of the U.P. Secondary Education Service Commission and Selection Board Act, 1982, hereinafter referred to as the Act. A clear vacancy was caused with effect from 1 -7 -1984 on the retirement of one Km. Leela Gupta in Lecturers' Grade. The Institution sent necessary intimation to the Commission but after no selected candidate was made available, the Institution filled up the post on ad hoc basis by direct recruitment by appointing Smt. Vidya Devi for a limited period up to 20 -5 -1985. After the aforesaid period, the Institution again advertised the post for ad hoc appointment by direct recruitment. On this Smt. Vidya Devi represented for extension of the period of her appointment. The selection of Smt. Madhumita Chaudhary was not approved by the Regional Inspectress of Girls' School and instead the particulars of Smt. Vidya Devi were required.

(2.) THE petitioner in her representation claimed that the ad hoc appointment under Section 18(b) is required to be made by promotion from amongst the senior -most teacher in L.T. Grade possessing the requisite qualification and eligibility. The petitioner being fully qualified with degree of M.A. L.T. in English was entitled to be promoted on the said post. Later on, on the consideration of the representation of the petitioner, the Committee of Management resolved to appoint the petitioner by promotion and an intimation' in this regard dated 9 -1 -1986 was sent to the Regional Inspectress of Girls Schools for approval.

(3.) PARA 5 further provides that where any vacancy cannot be filled by promotion under para 4, the same may be tilled by direct recruitment in accordance with clauses (2) to (5).