PREM SINGH VERMA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this writ petition the petitioner who was appointed as Assistant Teacher has challenged the order passed by the Joint Director dated 3.11.2012 whereby petitioner's representation for payment of post-retiral benefit has been rejected on the ground that petitioner was not a permanent teacher. Foundational facts in brief are that Karma Kshetra Inter College, Etawah is a recognized institution, wherein education is imparted upto the level of Intermediate. It receives aid out of State Fund. The provisions of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921, the Regulations framed thereunder, the Uttar Pradesh Secondary Education (Services Selection Board) Act, 1982 (U.P. Act No. 5 of 1982) and the U.P. High Schools and Intermediate College (Payment of Salaries to Teachers and other Employees) Act, 1971 are applicable to the institution. The institution is administered by the respondent No. 6, the Committee of Management.

(2.) It is averred by the petitioner that a regular/permanent Assistant Teacher namely Gyan Shanker Verma was promoted on the post of Lecturer causing a short term vacancy. The petitioner was appointed against the said vacancy as ad hoc Assistant Teacher in L.T. Grade after following the procedure prescribed under the law. After the appointment, the management sent the papers to the office of District Inspector of the Education for his approval.

(3.) The District Inspector of School having satisfied, accorded his approval, vide order dated 1.2.1995. The Copy of the said order is brought on the record as Annexure-1 to the writ petition. The petitioner joined his duties on the same day. He continuously worked in the Institution and drew his salary from the Salary Payment Account of the state. The Secondary Education Services Selection Board, for the some reasons, could not make selection against the post; therefore, he continued uninterruptedly. The petitioner reached his age of superannuation on 30.6.2012. He completed his 17 years 2 month service in the same status, i.e., on ad hoc basis. After his retirement the petitioner made a representation for his post retrial benefits including the pension. His repeated representation did not find favour from the authority concerned.