LAXMI SHANKER MISRA Vs. DISTRICT INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Chaudhary N.A. Khan, Advocate appearing for the appellant and Sri Ranvijay Singh, learned standing counsel appearing for respondent no. 1.

(2.) This special appeal has been filed by the appellant against the judgment and order dated 16 December, 1997 passed by learned single judge in writ petition no. 15741 of 1988 (Laxmi Shanker Misra vs. District Inspector of Schools, Allahabad and others) by which judgment the writ petition filed by the appellant was dismissed.

(3.) Facts of the case giving rise to this special appeal, briefly stated, are Lal Bahadur Shashtri Inter College, Dharwara, Allahabad (hereinafter referred to as institution) is a recognized institution under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 receiving aid from the State Government. The institution is also governed by UP Secondary Education Service Selection Board Act, 1982 (hereinafter referred to as 1982 Act). Aditya Prasad Nautiyal who was working as lecturer Sanskrit, retired on 30th June, 1983 causing a substantive vacancy on the post of lecturer Sanskrit. The appellant was working as confirmed L.T. grade teacher in the institution appointed with effect from 8th July, 1968. The appellant who is Master of Art with Sanskrit claimed promotion on the post of lecturer caused due to retirement of Aditya Prasad Nautiyal. The committee of management passed a resolution on 4th September, 1983 promoting the appellant as lecturer Sanskrit. The resolution was also passed to the effect that approval of adhoc promotion of the petitioner be obtained from District Inspector of Schools in accordance with the provisions of Removal of difficulties order. It appears that resolution was forwarded to the District Inspector of Schools. The District Inspector of Schools did not grant any approval to said promotion but raised an objection vide letter dated 14 May, 1987 to the effect that according to Rule promotion is made under 40% promotion quota. It was stated that the resolution of the committee of management for filing the post by promotion appears to be in excess of 40% promotion quota. The details were asked by the District Inspector of Schools as to which lecturers are working under promotion quota and which lecturers are working under direct recruitment. The committee of management in between passed a resolution for giving adhoc appointment to respondent no. 4, Shaym Narain Pandey, as lecturer Sanskrit on 24 January, 1987. The information of adhoc direct recruitment of respondent no. 3 has been made under section 18 of UP Act No. 5 of 1982 who has already been appointed on 1 November, 1986 which may be approved. The District Inspector of Schools by an order dated 24 may, 1988 approved the adhoc appointment of respondent no. 4 under section 18 of UP Act No. 5 of 1982 for the current academic session up to 20 May, 1988. The appellant filed a writ petition giving rise to this special appeal challenging the order dated 24 May, 1988 passed by District Inspector of Schools. In the writ petition the appellant prayed for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents not to interfere with the working of the appellant as lecturer Sanskrit and also a mandamus for payment of salary. By prayer no. iv it was claimed that mandamus be issued to Secondary Education Service Commission, Allahabad to promote the petitioner- appellant on the post of lecturer in Sanskrit on regular basis under 40% quota. In the aforesaid writ petition, counter affidavit was filed by the Management as well as respondent no. 4, Shyam Narain Pandey including supplementary counter affidavits and supplementary rejoinder affidavits. The writ petition was dismissed by learned single Judge vide its judgement and order dated 16 December, 1997 against which the present special appeal has been filed.