BECHAN PRASAD Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN the above petitions all the petitioners have been appointed as Assistant Teachers or Lecturers in INtermediate Colleges on ad hoc basis in substantive vacancies after 14th of July, 1992. The appointments of these petitioners have been made by the Committee of Managements of various institutions in violation of the provisions of section 18 of the U. P. Act No. 5 of 1982 as amended by U. P. Act No. 24 of 1992. Since the appointments of the petitioners have been made in violation of the provisions of U. P. Act No. 24 of 1992 substituting section 18 of U. P. Act No. 5 of 1982, in these group of petitions, the vires of U. P. Act No. 24 of 1992 have been challenged. IN writ petition No. 44474 of 1993, Bechan Prasad v. State of U. P. and others, Additional grounds have been urged by making an application, for amendments also challenging the vires of U. ?. Act No. 5 of 1982.

(2.) SRI A. N. Tripathi, learned Advocate appearing in writ petition No. 44474 of 1993 and Dr. R. G. Padia, learned counsel appearing in writ petition No. 29252 of 1993, Uittam Singh Negi and others v. District Inspector of Schools and others its well as in writ petition No. 44472 of 1993, Harish Mohan Khanduri v. District Inspector of Schools and others have submitted leading arguments. The counsel appearing in other writ petitions have adopted the arguments submitted by these counsels.

(3.) SRI A. N. Tripathi has challenged the vires of U. P. Act No. 5 of 1982 and U. P. Act No. 24 of 1992 on the following grounds :