SHUSHMA SHRIVASTAVA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SMT . Sushma Srivastava is before this Court, questioning the validity of judgment and order dated 20th August, 2014 (Smt. Sushma Srivastava vs. State of U.P. and others) passed by learned Single Judge holding appointment of petitioner -appellant to be patently illegal and the fact that the petitioner is not at all entitled for the salary from state exchequer.

(2.) BRIEF background of the case as is emanating is that at district Sitapur there is a recognized institution known as Rashtriya Kanya Inter College, Sidhauli and the said institution in question has a primary section also and same is part and parcel of the Institution and said primary section is coined as attached primary section. The Institution in question is covered under the provision of U.P. Act No. 2 of 1921. The institution in question is governed by the provisions of U.P. Act No.24 of 1971 for ensuring salary to teaching and non -teaching staff of institution. In the case of Samantika Chatterji vs. RICS, 1990 1 UPLBEC, keeping in view the definition of "Institution" provided under Section 2(b) attached primary sections have been held to be integral part of the institution concerned.

(3.) IN the said Institution in question a teacher Smt. Beena Mehrotra has been working as Assistant Teacher (BTC) Grade and she resigned on 1st July, 2000 and thereafter the Managing Committee of the Institution concerned sought permission from District Inspector of Schools, Sitapur for filling up of the said vacancy and District Inspector of Schools, Sitapur accorded permission accordingly. Petitioner submits that thereafter the Managing Committee of the Institution concerned advertised the said vacancy in question and copy of the advertisement in question has been filed as annexure -3 to the writ petition and as per the same the last date for applying for consideration of candidature was 21st July, 2000. Petitioner has stated that thereafter she along with other candidates faced the selection procedure and on the basis of quality point marks, she has been selected and papers thereafter have been transmitted for being scrutinized by the District Inspector of Schools, Sitapur for his financial concurrence and same has been accorded on 16th August, 2000. Petitioner's submission is that thereafter appointment letter has been issued and she has been performing and discharging her duties in the Institution concerned. Petitioner's submission is that she was paid her salary and thereafter her salary in question has been abruptly stopped and in this regard she has represented before District Inspector of Schools, Sitapur for payment of her salary but no action has been taken and then she was impelled to approach this Court by filing Writ Petition No.5480(S/S) of 2001 and therein an interim order was passed for payment of salary to her. Petitioner submits that in spite of the said interim order in her favour, payment of salary to her was not being ensured, then she filed contempt petition and thereafter her salary since 2003 has been paid continuously.