SARLA BEHERE Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH the Appellant Sri Sarla Behere and Respondent No. 5, Sri Virendra Kumar Pandey, claim to be teachers in Dr. K. P. Jaiswal Inter College, Allahabad (hereinafter referred to as the College). Sri Virendra Kumar Pandey filed writ petition No. 7139 of 1986. before this Court challenging the appointment of the Appellant. This writ petition was disposed of by this Court on 16.2.1990, directing the Respondent therein to pay his salary as L.T. Grade teacher from 1.10.1985 to 31.10.1985. Validity of the appointment of the Appellant was however, not decided by this Court, in view of the statement given by learned Counsel for Sri Virendra Kumar Pandey. Thereafter another writ petition No. nil of 1992 was filed by Sri Virendra Kumar Pandey, which was disposed of by this Court on 5.8.1992, directing the Additional Director of Education (Secondary) U.P. Allahabad, to decide the representation of Sri Virendra Kumar Pandey, within a period of six weeks from the date of presentation of certified copy of the order of this Court. While issuing the above direction this Court observed that:

(2.) IN the above writ petition although the Appellant was impleaded as Respondent No. 4 but no notice was given to her before passing the above order in pursuance of the order of this Court dated 5.8.1992 Additional Director of Education, vide order dated 18.2.1993, cancelled the appointment of the Appellant, in pursuance of which the Committee of Management of the College. vide its order dated 13.3.1993, terminated her services. Appellant filed a writ petition before this Court, challenging those orders, dated 18.2.1993 and 13.3.1993, passed by Additional Director of Education and Committee of Management, respectively. This writ petition has been dismissed by learned Single Judge, as not maintainable, on the ground that no relief can be granted to her unless the orders, passed in the two writ petitions, referred to above, viz., writ petition No. 7139 of 1986 and No. nil of 1992, are recalled/modified. Learned Single Judge relegated the Appellant to move applications in the aforesaid two writ petitions, for cancellation of the orders passed therein by this Court. Being aggrieved, the Appellant has filed this appeal.

(3.) IT is thus apparent that the orders dated 18.2.1993 and 13.3.1993 of the Additional Director of Education and the Committee of Management, respectively, were not even born when the two writ petitions, referred to above, were filed before this Court and were decided by it. Controversy was decided for the first time by the Additional Director of Education, on 18.2.1993, declaring Appellant's appointment as illegal and in pursuance thereof the Committee of Management cancelled her appointment on 13.3.1993. Writ petition filed by the Appellant, which has given rise to this appeal, is not on the same facts. Cause of action as well as relief claimed in this petition, are also different, when adverse orders have been passed by Additional Director and Committee of Management of the College, on 18.2.1993 and 13.3.1993 respectively, the Appellant was fully entitled to challenge them by means of this petition. As the controversy involved in the instant case was not involved in the two writ petitions, filed earlier by Respondent No. 5, the Appellant cannot be compelled to make application for recalling the orders passed in those cases.