AJAY KUMAR MISHRA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State of U.P.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was working as Assistant Teacher (L.T. Grade) in Vaidik Technical Evam Audyogik Inter College, Diviyapur, Auraiya (herein after referred as institution). As per the record there were 13 posts of lecturer in the institution out of which 5 posts were filled up by way of direct recruitment whereas 5 posts of lecturer were liable to be filled up? by way of promotion in the Institution. In this regard resolution was passed by the Committee of Management on 25.06.2007 and a letter was also sent to respondent no.2, the Regional Committee / Joint Director of Education, Kanpur Region, for consideration. In pursuance there of the order impugned dated 14.09.2007 has been passed by the Joint Director, Education and the consequential orders dated 06.11.2007 and 15.11.2007 were also passed by the District Inspector of Schools, the same are under challenge.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submits that in the identical facts the resolution has also been passed by the Committee of Management in favour of Smt. Veena Kumari Sharma who was working as Assistant Teacher (L.T. Grade) and her claim was also rejected by means of an order dated 15.11.2007. Aggrieved with the rejection order, she had filed writ petition No. 4023 of 2008 (Smt. Veena Kumari Sharma Vs. State of U.P. and others) and this Court vide order dated 28.03.2012 had allowed the writ petition with following observation: -