UMRAO PRASAD Vs. D I O S FATEHPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) S. R. Singh, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The dispute pertains to appointment in the post of Lecturer (Civics) which fell vacant due to death of permanent incumbent Sri Gyanendra Pratapon 11-6-1993 The Committee of Management passed resolution in its meeting held on 23-1-1994 giving ad hoc promotion to respondent Pradeep Kumar Sachan The District Inspector of Schools approved of the said resolution vide his letter dated 10-3-1995.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner urged that the petitioner being the senior most teacher in L. T. Grade was entitled to be given ad hoc pro motion and to Committee of Management was not justified in giving ad hoc promotion to the respondent Pradeep Kumar Sachan. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner ; the vacancy for the purposes of ad hoc appointment/promotion would be deemed to have occurred when the Com mittee of Management took up the matter for appointment/promotion after expiration of 60 days' period stipulated in Section 18 of the U. P. Secondary Education Services Commission, 1982. In support of his contention learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on Division Bench decisions in Hans Raj Singh v. U. P. Secondary Education Services Commission Allahabad (1990) 2 UPLBEC 1127 and Nand Kishore v. U. P. Secondary Education Ser vices Commission, (1993) 1 UPLBBC 201.

(3.) THE petition lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed in limine. Petition dismissed .