RATAN TANDON Vs. DISTRICT INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS KANPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON account of the promotion of Sri Bhagwati Prasad Awasthi, a teacher of C.T. Grade to the post of L.T. grade, on ad hoc basis in Bhartiya Vidyalaya Inter College, Kanpur (hereinafter referred to as the college), there came into existence a temporary vacancy in C.T. grade in the college, against which the petitioner claims to have been appointed on 3 -12 -1974 by the Committee of Management, on purely temporary basis, for the period ending on 30th June, 1976. It is alleged by the petitioner that he has continued to work upto 30th May, 1975 and has been paid the salary for the aforesaid period. The District Inspector of Schools, Kanpur (hereinafter referred to as D.I.O.S.) has, however, denied the appointment of the petitioner upto 30th June, 1975 and payment of the salary for the said period. In the counter -affidavit filed on behalf of D.I.O.S. It has been averred that the petitioner was appointed by the Management as general C.T. grade teacher upto 15 -1 -1975 and the resolution of the management for extending the appointment of the petitioner was dis -approved by the D.I.O.S. It is not necessary for this court to go into this controversy, as the petitioner claims to have been appointed again with effect from 1 -9 -1975 on the same post in C.T. grade in the college. The D.I.O.S. however, by his order dated 29 -10 -1975 has disapproved the appointment of the petitioner against which it appears a representation was made before the D.I.O.S., which was again rejected on 20 -3 -1976 and refusal to approve the appointment of the petitioner was re -affirmed later on. Inspite of dis -approval of the appointment by the D.I.O.S. it appears that the management permitted the petitioner to continue to work as C.T. grade teacher. The management of the college, however, made representation before the D.I.O.S. for regularisation of the service of the petitioner, which has also been rejected by him vide order dated 26 -4 -1978, on the ground that as the petitioner's appointment was disapproved earlier the question of his regularisation does not arise. It is against this order of refusal to regularise the services of the petitioner that this writ petition has been filed. The State has filed counter -affidavit and the petitioner has filed rejoinder -affidavit in reply thereto. I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) UNDER U.P. Secondary Education (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 1975, issued under. The U.P. Secondary Educational Laws (Amendment) Act, 1975, the Committee of Management of an Intermediate College was empowered to appoint a teacher on ad hoc basis for a period not exceeding six months and such an appointment is required by para 2(g) of the said Order, to be reported to the D.I.O.S., who was given the power to dis -approve such appointment. Upon disapproval the person so appointed loose the right to continue as a teacher. Para 2(g) of the aforesaid Order is reproduced below;

(3.) THIS court on 28 -8 -1978 merely restrained the respondents from making any appointment on the post held by the petitioner and it is this order which was confirmed subsequently on 21 -11 -1978. There was no order of this court to permit the petitioner to continue in the college. This court generally under Article 226 of the Constitution does not unsettle what has already been settled. If the petitioner has keen appointed in the college either in C.T. grade or in I.T. grade and is working till today, it is desirable that the petitioner's working should not be disturbed and he may be permitted to continue to work as a teacher in the college, The respondents are accordingly directed not to interfere with the working of the petitioner in the college as a teacher, if he is working till today. It is however, made clear that if he is not working in the college this judgment will not entitle him to work in the college. With the aforesaid observations the writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.