HAR GOVIND SINGH SHAKYA Vs. COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT SRI RASAL SINGH HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL FARRUKHABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) D. K. Seth, J. By an order dated 5-7-85 issued by the Additional Secretary, Department of Intermediate Education U. P. Allahabad had accorded sanction to the concerned Institution for recognising science subject mentioned in the said order which included Biology. A copy of the said order is Annexure-1 to the writ petition. In the said order certain conditions were im posed on the institution clause 2 therein provided that for the purpose of teaching the subjects sanctioned, teachers, having requisite qualifications prescribed by the Parishad. may be appointed in accordance with the rules. A copy of the said order was also sent to the Deputy Director of Educa tion as well as Regional Deputy Director of Education. Pursuant to the said sanction, the petitioner was given appointment on ad hoc basis under Section 18 of the U. P. Secondary Education Service Commission and Selection Board Act, 1982 (hereinafter called as the Act') after complying with relevant rules which fact has not been dis puted by the respondents. The papers relat ing to his appointment was forwarded for approval before the appropriate authority. Accordingly, the same was forwarded to the Deputy Director of Education of the con cerned region. But no reply thereto having been received, the school authority by an order dated 4-5-94 sought to dispense with the service of the petitioner. It has given rise to the petitioner's grievance on account of inaction on the part of the Deputy Director of Education in according approval.

(2.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner Shri Y. K. Saxena submits that the Deputy Director of Education cannot remain idle. He is bound either to approve or to disap prove the appointment of the petitioner, the petitioner cannot be made to suffer on account of the inaction on the part of the Deputy Director of Education. But im pugned order, as contained in Annexurc-9 to the writ petition, issued by the school authority on 4-5-94 was a consequence of the inaction on the part of the Deputy Director of Education. This gave rise to the grievance of the petitioner who had ac quired a right by virtue of his appointment under Section 18 of the Act since according to him his appointment has been made after complying the procedure prescribed par ticularly those contained in Section 18 thereof. Relying on the definition of "teacher" as contained in Section 2 (e) of the U. P. High School and Intermediate Col leges (Payment of Salaries to Teachers and other Employees) Act, 1971, includes a teacher employed in fulfilment of the condi tions of recognition of the institution in cluding the recognition in a new subject and as such it is contended that the petitioner is entitled by reasons of his appointment and recognition of a new subject to receive salary under the said Act as well as the disposal of the question of grant of approval by the Deputy Director of Education.

(3.) MR. Sabhajit Yadav, learned Stand ing Counsel refers to Chapter II, R. 19 of the Regulations framed under the U. P. Inter mediate Education Act, 1921 and contends that the Government shall decline to pay salary and other allowances if any, teacher is appointed in contravention of the provisions of-the Chapter or against any post other than a sanctioned post. MR. Yadav, does not contend that there Was any contravention of the provisions of Chapter II Regulation 19, whereas on the other hand he insists that the appointment was made in a post other than a sanctioned post. But the said contention does not cut any ice. Inas much as it was so held in the case of Com mittee of Management Krishak Inter mediate College Gaur, Basti (supra) that recognition of new subject amounts to crea tion of post in the subject.