COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri M.A. Qadeer, learned senior counsel, for the petitioners and Sri Ashok Khare, learned senior counsel, for the respondent Nos. 5 to 12 and learned standing counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 to 4. Learned counsel for the parties agree that the matter be disposed of finally at this stage itself as the learned counsel for the respondents including the learned standing counsel do not propose to file any counter-affidavit.

(2.) The order impugned is an outcome of the directions issued by this Court on 13.12.2012 and on 6.12.2012 in two writ petitions filed by employees of a Madarsa where a direction was issued to decide the status of those employees, including the Head of the Institution who are stated to have been appointed by the alleged former management of which the respondent No. 5, Idrish Khan was the Manager. This direction was issued in view of the past litigation between the parties that related to the dispute of control of management over Madarsa Rizviya Ahle Sunnat Rustampur, Sanichara Bazar, District Sant Kabir Nagar.

(3.) Sri Qadeer submits that the impugned order proceeds on erroneous assumptions of facts and irrelevant considerations by bifurcating the employees in two sections for the purpose of acknowledging their status and entitlement to receive salary and it ignores the impact of the order of the Prescribed Authority dated 6th June, 2011. He further contends that the orders of the Apex Court as well as of this Court, as passed from time to time, have been completely misconstrued so as to find partial favour in relation to the contesting respondents treating them to have been validly appointed employees as they had been appointed prior to the final decision of the Apex Court on 25.7.2012. His contention is that there is absolutely no rational nexus which can be located to justify this finding in the impugned order.