ASHOK KUMAR RAI Vs. DISTRICT INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 10.10.2000 (Annexure-15) to the writ petition passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Ghazipur.

(2.) There happens to be an Intermediate College known as Kedar Narain Krishak Inter College, Uchauri, district Ghazipur (herein-after referred to. as the college), which is recognised by the U. P . Board of High Schools and Intermediate Education Act which receives the grant-in-aid from the State Government. The petitioner claims to have been appointed as Assistant Teacher in C. T. grade on 4.10.1984 which was approved by the District Inspector of Schools . It is stated that as a policy decision, the C.T. grade was declared as dying cadre and as such, there remained only two cadres i.e., L.T. grade and Lecturer's grade. It has been stated in para 4 of the writ petition that the decision was made effective w.e.f. 1.1.1986, consequently, the petitioner started receiving all the benefits available to the Assistant Teacher in L.T. grade, including the salary. The petitioner claims that as he was appointed in the year 1984 and, therefore, in view of the amendment inserted in U. P. Act No. 5 of 1982, the petitioner's services, which were on ad-hoc basis, were regularised per order dated 4.8.1995 passed by the Joint Director of Education. It is claimed that one Lalita Prasad, who was working as Lecturer in Economics retired on 30.3.1995, on account of which, a substantive vacancy on the post of Lecturer (Economics) came into existence. It has been claimed that in view of paras 4 and 5 of U. P. Secondary Education Services Commission (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 1981, all the vacancies in Lecturer's grade were to be filled from qualified teachers working in L.T. grade and direct recruitment can be made only when no teacher is available in the institution in the L.T. grade. As the petitioner has been working as Assistant Teacher in L.T. grade and was getting salary in that scale and as according to the petitioner, he had already completed more than 8 years service as L.T. grade on the date of occurrence of vacancy, he claimed for promotion on the post of Lecturer referred above which was considered. After the notification of vacancy of the post of Lecturer (Economics) to the Commission through the District Inspector of Schools, when no candidate was made available, the Committee of Management passed resolution for promotion of the petitioner on the post of Lecturer (Economics) on 10.8.1995. The papers regarding petitioner's promotion was forwarded to the District Inspector of Schools for approval who after considering the entire facts accorded approval by order dated 14.5.1997 upon which, letter of appointment was given to the petitioner No. 14.7.1997 by the Manager of the Institution. In pursuance of the aforesaid exercise, the petitioner's salary was duly fixed in the Lecturer's grade and necessary entries with regard to the promotion were also made in his service book and without any break, the petitioner started receiving continuous salary in the Lecturer's grade. It has been stated in the writ petition, that in respect to the working/functioning of Manager, Kuber Nath Singh, who has filed Caveat application in this petition and also a counter-affidavit, opposing the petitioner's claim, complaint was made in respect to various kind of financial irregularities and embezzlement of huge amount of money and no-confidence motion was also put and carried out. On enquiry, it was found that Kuber Nath Singh has mis-appropriated a sum of Rs. 09.85 lacs from college fund and college property besides other misappropriation. It is said that aforesaid Kuber Nath Singh was removed and in his place Rajendra Prasad Pandey was elected as Manager of the College. It is at this stage, the pleadings set forth by the petitioner, states that again Kuber Nath Singh, some how or the other succeeded in getting his signature attested from the District Inspector of Schools but the same was challenged by Rajendra Prasad Pandey in which an interim order was granted on 11.6.1999 which was made absolute on 18.8.1999 (although there appears to be some dispute about continuance of stay order) and thus it is Rajendra Prasad Pandey who is functioning as Manager. It has been stated that although Kuber Nath Singh was removed but he lodged frivolous complaint abdut illegal appointment/ promotion of the petitioner on the pretext that he obtained it on incorrect resolution, although petitioner was not eligible for promotion. It is stated that the said complaint was made before the District Magistrate, Ghazipur, upon which, the S.D.M., Sadar was asked to hold enquiry who in its turn submitted report to the District Inspector of Schools, upon which he passed the order dated 10.10.2000 by which the approval, so accorded to the petitioner's promotion was cancelled. It is this order of the District Inspector of Schools by which the petitioner's promotion on the post of Lecturer (Economics) has been cancelled, is under challenge before this Court.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order of the District Inspector of Schools besides being illegal, unwarranted on the facts, is also in violation of principle of natural justice. It is further submitted that the District Inspector of Schools without examining the matter himself, has proceeded to take decision solely on the report submitted by the S.D.M., Sadar for which the petitioner was never afforded any opportunity in any manner. It has been further submitted that on the facts of the present case and from the record also, it is fully clear that the petitioner is eligible and qualified to be promoted as Lecturer in Economics and the approval was given by the District Inspector of Schools to the petitioner's promotion on correct facts. Lastly, it has been submitted that the entire exercise adverse to the petitioner's interest started at the initiation by the then Manager Kuber Nath Singh. who was already removed from the post, on account of serious charges of financial irregularity. Learned counsel submits that the District Inspector of Schools has not properly attended the matter and solely on the basis of the report as submitted by the S.D.M., Sadar to which the petitioner had no opportunity, has passed the impugned order, which is liable to be quashed by this Court. Learned counsel in support of his contention about the entitlement of the petitioner for promotion having completed five years service in L.T. grade, has placed reliance on a decision given by this Court in the case of Santosh Kumar Singh v. District Inspector of Schools, 1995 (3) AWC 1579 ; 1995 (3) ESC 21.