SAVITA GUPTA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Ashok Khare, senior advocate assisted by Sri V. K. Singh for petitioner and Sri S. K. Verma for respondent No. 7. Sri R. S. Parihar learned standing counsel appears for rest of the respondents.

(2.) The Raghunath Girls Inter College, Meerut is a recognised and aided Intermediate College, and is governed by the provisions of U. P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921, U. P. Secondary Education and Selection Boards Act No. 5 of 1982 and U. P. Act No. 24 of 1971. The petitioner applied and was selected in April, 2004, for ad hoc appointment against a vacant post of assistant teacher in L.T. grade. The appointment letter was issued on 24.4,1993. The petitioner Joined on 27.4.1993 and is serving since thereafter in Trained Teacher's grade. She claims to be regularised under Section 33C of U. P. Act No. 5 of 1982, as amended on 30.4.1998 providing for regularisation of ad hoc teachers appointed prior to 6.8.1993. The Joint Director of Education, Meerut Region, Meerut, vide his order dated 26.6.2000 conveyed the decision of Selection Committee to regularise petitioner's appointment in L.T. grade.

(3.) Km. Sushma Batra, a permanent Lecturer in English in the institution retired on 30.6.2001, causing a substantive vacancy on the post of Lecturer in English. It is contended that the vacancy fell in 50% quota for promotion. The petitioner is M.A. in Arts and M.A. in English, and is qualified for appointment. The Committee of Management in its meeting dated 14.6.2003 resolved to promote the petitioner as Lecturer in English in promotion quota, and that since after 1.7.2003, the petitioner is teaching English as a subject to Classes XI and XII. The U. P. Secondary Education Services Selection Board, Allahabad (In short the Board) issued an order dated 7.1.2004 recommending that Smt. Geeta, respondent No. 7, be appointed as Lecturer in English. The District Inspector of Schools by his order dated 27,1.2004 directed the management to grant appointment to Smt. Geeta, and that on 6.2.2003 the inspector returned the papers relating to promotion of the petitioner with his findings that she is ineligible as she does not have five years regular service to her credit for promotion.