SHAILESH LAL Vs. D.I.O.S.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE contention of the petitioner is that a short term vacancy for the post of Assistant Teacher in L.T. Grade occurred in Janta Janardan Inter College, Gandhi Nagar District Ghazipur due to adhoc promotion of Sri Paras Nath Srivastava on the post of Lecturer in Economics. It is stated that adhoc promotion of Shri Paras Nath Srivastava was approved by the District Inspector of Schools, Ghazipur (hereinafter referred to as "D.I.O.S.") on 20.5.1992. The Prabandh Sanchalak, incharge of the institution, advertised the said short term vacancy on the notice board on 5.5.1993 and the petitioner was selected by the selection committee. The Prabandh Sanchalak made a proposal for appointment of the petitioner against the said short term vacancy in the post of Assistant Teacher in L.T. grade and the proposal was sent with relevant papers for approval of the appointment of the petitioner to the District Inspector of Schools on 1.6.1993. As no approval was accorded by the D.I.O.S. the Prabandh Sanchalak issued appointment letter dated 5.7.1993 appointing the petitioner against the said post in short term vacancy, following which the petitioner joined his duties. As in spite of repeated representations the salary was not being paid, ultimately this writ petition was filed for payment of salary. The respondent No. 1 filed counter affidavit contending that the authorised controller did not give any intimation about the vacancy to the D.I.O.S. and by virtue of order dated 9.12.1991 passed by this Court, the authorised controller was only entitled to pass orders in respect of financial matter and as such Prabandh Sanchalak was not entitled to make appointment. It is also stated by the respondent No. 1 that by order dated 11.1.1994 the petitioner's appointment was refused to be approved and a copy of said order has been annexed as Annexure No. 2 to the counter affidavit.

(2.) THE petitioner filed rejoinder affidavit.

(3.) IN view of the aforesaid finding, I do not find that the appointment of the petitioner by the authorised controller is illegal because of the said order of this court. Pendency of the writ petition relating to Sri Paras Nath Srivastava also does not affect the present petitioner's right.