COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT PRAHLAD RAI BANARSI LAL GIRLS INTERMEDIATE COLLEGE KHALILABAD BASTI Vs. URMILA DEVI SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -This intra-Court appeal, under Rules of the Court, arises from the judgment and order dated 24.7.1997 passed by the Hon'ble single Judge disposing of finally the Writ Petition No. 10853 of 1980 of the petitioner-respondent seeking the relief of permitting the petitioner-respondent to resume the teaching work in the Institution and to make payment of salary to her w.e.f. 16.11.1976 onwards.

(2.) THE brief facts, emerging from the record are that the petitioner-respondent No. 1, Smt. Urmila Devi Singh was appointed as an untrained teacher in Prahlad Rai Banarsi Lal Girls Intermediate College, Khalilabad District Basti (hereinafter described as the "Institution") on 8.10.1974. Initially her appointment was for a fixed period, i.e., for the academic session 1974-75. This appointment was duly approved by the Regional Inspectress of Girls Schools, VII Region, Gorakhpur. Petitioner-respondent No. 1, who was a graduate possessing Inter Grade drawing certificate from Bombay was engaged to teach Art subject in the Institution. She was the only Art teacher in the institution. Petitioner-respondent No. 1 was allowed extension of her employment and she continued to teach in the institution till 15.11.1976. All the appointments granted by the appellant-respondent were duly approved by the Regional Inspectress of Girls School, the appropriate authority. THE Hon'ble single Judge taking note of Para 3 of the 5th Removal of Difficulties Order, 1976, has treated Smt. Urmila Devi to have been appointed in substantive capacity from the date of her acquiring the requisite training qualification in terms of Para 3 (d) of the said Removal of Difficulties Order, 1976. Para 3 of the 5th Removal of Difficulties Order, 1976 is relevant and is quoted below :

(3.) SHRI Ashok Khare, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner-respondent has opposed the appeal and reiterated his submissions made in the body of the writ petition, counter-affidavit and other documents. As per the learned counsel for the respondents six clear permanent posts of teachers fell vacant in the Institution. Smt. Urmila Singh, who was possessing minimum prescribed qualifications meant for an Art teacher, had applied against one of the posts. She was appointed by the Management of the Institution and the Regional Inspectress of Girls Schools Gorakhpur Region, Gorakhpur had accorded approval of her appointment. Initially the approval was granted on temporary basis for the academic session 1974-75 vide letter dated 1.10.1974 issued by the Regional Inspectress of Girls Schools, Gorakhpur Region, Gorakhpur. Approval was further granted on the request of the Management which had continued to retain the petitioner-respondent in service in the academic sessions 1975-76 also. SHRI Ashok Khare, learned senior counsel has drawn attention of the Court to various provisions contained in the second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh Removal of Difficulties Orders, which were issued between 18.8.1975 to 16.8.1977. According to him, the case of respondent No. 1 was entirely covered by the 5th Removal of Difficulties Order, 1976 and 7th Removal of Difficulties Order, issued on 16.8.1977. The petitioner-respondent No. 1 was undergoing training and she had acquired the requisite training in 1976-77 batch of the teachers and after the introduction of 7th Removal of Difficulties Order, she should have been deemed to have been regularized. He has drawn attention of the Court to para 4 of the Seventh Removal of Difficulties Order, issued on 16.8.1977. Respondent No. 1 has been continuously teaching Art subject to the students studying in classes 6th to 10th in the Institution. She was possessing the special qualification having completed Bombay Art Course with technical art subject. Presently, she is a graduate and has also undergone training as a teacher of 1976-77 batch. Her conduct and performance as an Art teacher has always remained satisfactory. She was prevented to work in the middle of academic session, i.e., 17.11.1976 giving cause of action to the petitioner-respondent to approach the appropriate authorities and the Court for redressal of her grievances. The Hon'ble single Judge took into account all the facts and has rightly allowed the writ petition.