DHARAM DEO Vs. DISTRICT INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS MAU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRAKASH Krishna, J. The challenge in the present writ petition is the order dated 21st August, 1991, passed by respondent No. 1, District Inspector of Schools, promoting Surendra Nath Yadav, respondent No. 3 from the post of L. T. grade teacher to Lecturer's grade in Economics. The grievance of the petitioner is that his claim for promotion on the aforesaid post of Lecturer in Economics has not at all been considered, illegally and he being entitled for promotion to the aforesaid post, and was within the zone of consideration the impugned order is liable to be quashed, for ignoring his claim even for consideration.

(2.) THE facts of the case lie in a narrow compass. THE facts which are not much in dispute or cannot be possibly be disputed by either parties are as follows:

(3.) A dispute arose between the petitioner on the one hand and respondent No. 3 on the other hand, when the management decided to fill up the vacancy on the post of Economics Lecturer which fell vacant due to appointment of Sri Ram Pati Pandey as Principal of the College. The petitioner claimed that he should be promoted, thus, he made a number of representations detailed in para 12 of the writ petition. They are dated 21st April, 1990, 3rd July, 1990, 4th September, 1990, 10th December, 1990 and 13th February, 1991 addressed to the Management of the College. He made representation staking his claim for promotion to the District Inspector of Schools also on 4th January, 1991 and 14th February, 1991 as mentioned in para 13 of the writ petition. The management in its meeting dated 23rd December, 1990 by resolution No. 3 (Annexure-11 to the writ petition) resolved to promote Sri Surendra Nath Yadav, respondent No. 3 on the post on the post which fell vacant on account of selection of Ram Pati Pandey as Principal of the College and his assuming charge as such, on ad hoc basis. The said resolution has been approved by the District Inspector of Schools by the order dated 21st August, 1991, granting approval for ad hoc promotion of Sri Surendra Nath Yadav, respondent No. 3 with the stipulation that he shall continue till a duly selected candidate from the Commission joins or on the detection of any concealment of fact. The said resolution of the committee of management and the approval order dated 21st August, 1991 have been challenged presently in the petition.