ANIL KUMAR Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri D.P. Singh, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Smt. Archana Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri K. Ajit, learned counsel for respondent nos. 6 and 7 and learned Standing Counsel for the Staterespondents.

(2.) ASSISTANT Director of Education (Basic), Aligarh/Agra Division, Agra under the impugned order dated 22nd July, 2009 has held that temporary appointment of the petitioner as head master of a recognised junior high school, referable to Rule 20 of Uttar Pradesh Recognised Basic Schools (Junior High Schools) (Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Teachers) Rules, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules, 1978') could be made for a period of six months only. The said period of six months expired long back inasmuch as he was appointed on 30th November, 2008, under the approval dated 31st December, 2008. The Committee of Management, however, illegally forwarded a resolution for extension of the appointment of the petitioner, which was approved by the Basic Shiksha Adhikari on 3rd January, 2009. He has directed that the order of approval dated 3rd July, 2009 granted by the Basic Shiksha Adhikari, wherein temporary appointment of the petitioner on the post of headmaster was again extended for six months, was illegal and is therefore, set aside. A direction to hold fresh selection for regular appointment on the post of principal of the institution and in the meantime charge of the post of principal being given to the senior most teacher of the institution has also been issued.

(3.) THE contention so raised on behalf of the petitioner is objected to by the respondents, on the ground that proviso to Rule-20 has to be read along with the main provision. He contends that the said proviso would be applicable only when the period of six months expires during an academic session, and in that circumstance appointment can be extended till the end of the academic session, the purpose being that the work of the institution may not suffer in absence of principal/headmaster, during mid-academic session. He clarifies that such extension of appointment cannot be overstretched so as to read that even after expiry of six months, further extension for next academic session can be asked for or granted. He further contended that the petitioner is not possessed of the prescribed minimum qualification qua the post of Principal.