CHANDAN KUMAR JAISWAL Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard counsel for the petitioner, learned standing counsel for respondents no.1 & 2 and Sri Syed Nadeem Ahmad for respondents no.3 and 4.

(2.) The petitioner has prayed for a writ of certiorari quashing the communication dated 24.4.2017 by which Finance and Accounts Officer, Basic Education, Mau, has raised doubts on the validity of appointments of certain Clerks in different Junior High Schools, including the petitioner herein. The petitioner was appointed on vacant post of Clerk in respondent no.5 institution on basis of recommendation of the Section Committee dated 30.3.2016. The District Basic Education Officer, respondent no.3 granted approval to the said appointment by order dated 31.3.2016. The petitioner was issued appointment order on 4.4.4016 and he started working since 9.4.2016. It seems that when the matter relating to payment of salary to the petitioner came up before the Finance and Accounts Officer, Basic Education, Mau, he was of the opinion that there was a ban on appointments on Class III posts in Junior High Schools. He has, therefore, sought clarification from District Basic Education Officer as to how he has granted approval and how salary could be paid to these persons.

(3.) The impugned communication refers to a Government Order dated 6.11.2015, whereby the ban imposed by Government Order dated 15.3.2012 upon appointments on the posts of teaching and non-teaching staff in various Junior High Schools was relaxed in respect of vacant posts of Headmasters and Assistant Teachers. The fourth respondent has concluded from the said Government Order that the ban in respect of non- teaching staff is thus still in operation.