GAYA DUTT TEWARI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Respondent institution namely, Mata Ashthabhuja Laghu Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Salempur, District Deoria is a recognized Junior High School imparting education from Class-VI to VIII. The permanent recognition was granted to the institution on 12.2.1985 as a result of grant of recognition the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Recognized Basic Schools (Junior High School) (Recruitment and conditions of services of teachers) Rules, 1978 (in short as the 'Rules) are applicable to the said institution. The dispute in this writ petition relates to the appointment of the petitioners to the post of Assistant Teacher against the sanctioned strength of teaching faculty in the institution, vide communication dated 20.9.2000 issued by the Director of Education (Basic) U.P. Allahabad the sanctioned strength of the institution was shown as 14 which consists of one post of principal, 9 posts of Assistant Teachers, one post of clerk and 3 posts of Class IV employees. Initially strength was 10 enhanced to 14 after 4 posts of Assistant Teacher were sanctioned by the Director of Education (Basic). For filling up of the four posts of Assistant Teachers sanctioned for the institution, the management vide its order dated 22.2.2003 sought permission from the District Basic Education Officer for advertising the vacancies for appointment. The permission was accorded by the District Basic Education Officer, respondent No. 4, in this behalf. The process for selection was initiated after permission was obtained. A selection committee was constituted in terms of the Rules of 1978 consisted of Manager, Head-Master of the institution and a nominee of the District Basic Education Officer. The selection was preceded by advertisement notice which was published in newspapers 'Dainik Jagran' and also in the newspapers 'Hindustan Ke Swaroop' and 'Gram Swarajaya' on 1.3.2003. In pursuance of the advertisement, the petitioners applied for the post of Assistant Teacher being eligible under the Rules. It is important to mention that respondent No. 4 appointed Assistant District Basic Education Officer as a nominee for participating in the selection process. The conclusion of the selection process resulted in selection of the petitioners. The recommendations of the selection committee was accepted by the managing committee on 4.4.2003. Consequently the papers were sent to the District Basic Education Officer, respondent No. 4, alongwith covering letter for grant of approval. Thereafter, nothing was heard by the managing committee from the District Basic Officer and matter remained pending with them.

(2.) Having failed to receive any response from respondent No. 4, the managing committee appointed the petitioners as Assistant Teachers without any formal order passed by respondent No. 4. This was done by taking recourse to Rule-10(5) (iii) of the Rules of 1978, which proves that if the District Basic Education does not communicate his decision within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the papers, there shall be deemed approval.

(3.) After their appointments the petitioner joined the institution as Assistant Teachers. In the meanwhile an order was passed by the Government by which the institution was brought on grants-in-aid list w.e.f. 1.12.2006, as a result of which, the salary component was required to be paid by the State Government, The problem of the petitioners starts from here as their salary was not released despite various representations were made by the petitioners as well as management of the institution. Under these circumstances the present writ petition has been filed.