ASHOK KUMAR MISHRA Vs. ZILA BASIC SHIKSHA ADHIKARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition seeks the quashing of the order dated 27th October, 1999 passed by the Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari by which the representation filed by the petitioner for payment of salary was rejected. The petitioner has also sought a direction upon the respondents to pay salary w. e. f. 1st April, 1996 on the post of Assistant Teacher and to continue to pay the same.

(2.) THE petitioner claims to be working as an Assistant Teacher in the B. S. S. Junior High School Shramik Basti Babu Purwa Kanpur Nagar (hereinafter referred to as the ''junior High School') from 15th January, 1983. The said Junior High School is a recognised Junior High School and is governed by the provisions of ''the Uttar Pradesh Recognised Basic Schools (Junior High Schools) (Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Teachers) Rules, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as the ''rules' ). It is stated that the said Junior High School was brought in the grant-in-aid list of the State Government w. e. f. 1st April, 1996. The petitioner claims that though the salary was paid to him by the Committee of Management upto 31st March, 1996 but when the Junior High School was brought in the grant-in-aid list, salary was not paid to him as a result of which he filed a representation before the Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari on 1st May, 1996 and thereafter filed Writ Petition No. 5428 which was disposed of by this Court by the judgment and order dated 17th February, 1997 with a direction to the District Basic Education Officer Kanpur Nagar to decide the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law. The District Basic Education Officer, Kanpur Nagar by his order dated 27th October, 1999 rejected the representation of the petitioner. It is this order which has been challenged in this writ petition.

(3.) IT has been stated in the impugned order that the petitioner does not possess the appointment order; that he does not have the requisite minimum qualifications prescribed under the Rules for the post of Assistant Teacher; that he was not appointed in accordance with the procedure prescribed under the Rules and nor was his appointment approved by the Department. Accordingly, the claim for payment of salary was not justified.