TRIPAL SINGH Vs. DY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION (REGION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution the petitioner Tripal Singh has prayed for a writ of certiorari to quash the order dated 2-9-1981 (annexure V to the petition) passed by respondent No 1, the Deputy Director of Education, Region I, Meerut.

(2.) Briefly stated the facts are that Chaudhary Charan Singh Uchciitar Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Goela, Muzaffarnagar, is a recognised institution as provided under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, as amended upto date. The said institution is being managed in accordance with the provisions of a duly approved scheme of Administration. The petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Clerk in the said school on 1-9-1977 and after the completion of one years probationary period he was confirmed with effect from 1-9-1978. The petitioner discharge his duties without any interruption till 19-7-1980 whereafter the Principal of the institution did not permit him to sign the register against which a representation dated 22-7-1980 was preferred by the petitioner to the District Inspector of Schools, Muzaffarnagar. The Manager of the institution then started alleging that, the petitioner was appointed on an ad-hoc basis and there was no approval for his appointment by the Committee of Management. An enquiry was initiated by the District Inspector of Schools, Muzaffarnagar, whereafter the order dated 22-9-1980 was passed by the District Inspector o' Schools. Muzaffarnagar, to the effect that since the petitioner was working uninterruptedly with effect from 1-9-1977 and was confirmed with effect from 1-9-1978, the action of the Manager in not allowing him to sign the register or claiming his removal from service was illegal. The District Inspector of Schools further directed that the petitioner was entitled to hold the post and to the salary for the relevant period. An appeal against the aforesaid order of the District Inspector of Schools, Muzaffarnagar, was filed by the Manager of the Institution Sri Harpal Singh on 21 10-1980 before the Deputy Director of Education, respondent No. 1. The respondent No 1 decided the appeal vide his order dated 2-9-1981 after affording opportunities to the parties and quashed the order dated 22-9-1980 passed by the District Inspector of Schools holding that the petitioner had no right to hold the post of the clerk in the &aid institution.

(3.) The petitioner has challenged the aforesaid order of respondent No. 1 dated 2-9-1981 in this petition.