BABITA SAXENA Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner in this writ petition is seeking a direction to the respondents to ensure his joining on the post of Principal in the Nehru Nagar Palika Inter College, Gandhi Park, District Rampur (the College) in terms of the order dated 14.6.2012 passed by the Deputy Secretary Uttar Pradesh Secondary Education Services Selection Board (hereinafter referred to as the 'Board').

(2.) Briefly stated the facts of the case are that for selection to the post of Principal in the Government aided Intermediate Colleges an Advertisement no.1/2002 was notified in the year 2002. The petitioner alongwith several other candidates was also a candidate. A select panel was prepared and the petitioner was placed at Sl. No.2 in terms of the select list notified on 11.9.2002. One Km. Santosh Srivastava was at Sl. No.1 above the petitioner. It appears that the selection of 2002 was not operated as there was some litigation going on which matter went up to the Supreme Court in SLP No. 19335-336 of 2003 and therefore appointment letter was not issued to any of the selected candidates. Finally the said SLP was decided in favour of the Board by judgment dated 16.5.2008. Thereafter the select panel was verified by the Board and as would be evidenced from the correspondence dated 7.7.2008 between the Board and the respondent no.3, District Inspector of Schools, Rampur (hereinafter referred to as the DIOS) and the Board directed the DIOS to ensure joining be given as per the panel dated 11.9.2002. On 5.9.2011, Km. Santosh Srivastava, at Sl. No.1 of the select list, informed the DIOS that she was not willing to join the Institution. Accordingly, the respondent no.3, DIOS by his letter dated 20.9.2011 ( Copy of which has been filed as Annexure-2 to the writ petition) intimated the Board about the name of the petitioner for being issued the appointment letter for the post of Principal in the Nehru Nagar Palika Inter College, Gandhi Park, District Rampur. When no appointment letter was issued to the petitioner, the DIOS by his letter dated 14.10.2011 informed the City Magistrate Rampur, who was in administrative control of the college, to issue letter of appointment to the petitioner and ensure her joining within one week. A reminder letter was issued on 14.11.2011. Ultimately by an order dated 16.12.2011 (Annexure 5 to the writ petition) an order of appointment was issued by the City Magistrate/Administrative Controller to the petitioner to take charge of the post of Principal within one week or it will be presumed that he was not interested in taking charge of the post and the Board as well as DIOS shall be informed accordingly.

(3.) In para 17 of the writ petition, it has been stated that the petitioner twice tried to submit her joining but the respondent no.4, Manager of the College did not allow her joining. Subsequently an order dated 8.5.2012 (Annexure-6 to the writ petition) was issued by the DIOS to the Manager of the College respondent no.4 informing that a fresh advertisement has been issued by the Board but in case the petitioner is allowed joining, the said publication will be cancelled. Again nothing was communicated to the petitioner and then the respondent no.2, Board issued a letter dated 14.6.2012 addressed to the DIOS informing him that in pursuance of the advertisement no.1/2002 select panel was issued on 11.9.2002 in which Km. Santosh Srivastava was at Sl. No.1 and the petitioner Km. Babita Saxena was at Sl. No.2 but because the matter had been pending before the Supreme Court the panel could not be operated and it is only after the judgement of the Supreme Court dated 16.5.2008 went in favour of the Board that approval of the panel had been done on 7.7.2008 and therefore, the panel may be operated and informed to the Board that in case the candidate at Sl.No. 1 and Sl. No.2 are not available for appointment even then information may be sent to the Board since a fresh selection had already been notified. The petitioner is now pressing that in pursuance of the letter of the Board dated 14.6.2012 a direction may be issued to either the respondent no.3, DIOS or to the Manager of the College in question, respondent no.4 to allow the petitioner to join the College. At the time of admission this Court by its order dated 31.1.2014 had issued notice to the respondent to file counter affidavit within two weeks and the matter was fixed for 18.2.2014 and the DIOS was directed to be present in the Court with the original records to assist the Court as to why the petitioner was not allowed to join. Thereafter again on 27.2.2014 a direction was given to the respondent no.3 to ensure that the petitioner was given joining and in case joining is not given Smt. Maya Devi, the DIOS who was present in Court was directed to ensure that the respondent no.4, College in question gives joining to the petitioner on 11.3.2014. The matter again came up on 12.3.2014 when it was again informed that the petitioner had not been allowed joining by the College. Sri Upendra Singh, learned Standing Counsel was also directed to obtain instructions as no counter affidavit had been filed by the State-respondents in spite of time having been granted.