PRAMOD KUMAR YADAV Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel and perused the record.

(2.) THE present writ petition has been preferred for quashing of the impugned order dated 5.6.2006 passed by respondent no.3, D.I.O.S., Azamgarh (annexure 10 to this writ petition) rejecting the claim of the petitioner for payment of salary for Assistant Teacher (P.T.).

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submitted that the appointment of the petitioner was after requisition was sent by the committee of management and after communication of the vacancy and approval of the D.I.O.S., Azamgarh. Hence petitioner was entitled for payment of salary. However, D.I.O.S. merely on the ground that selection was to be made by the board refused to grant financial approval for payment of salary. He further submitted that the petition was filed by one Satish Kumar Srivastava, who was also appointed as lecturer in the institution and after direction of the High Court the approval has been granted and he is getting salary.