SURENDRA NARAIN PANDEY Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner alleges to be a duly appointed Lecturer in Sanskrit in the P. D. N. D. Inter College, Chunar (hereinafter referred to as the institution). His prayer is that the respondents may be directed to treat him to be in continuous service from 19th December, 1986 and pay him accordingly till a candidate duly selected by the U. P. Secondary Education Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as the Commission) joins the post held by him.

(2.) THE material averments are these. A substantive vacancy arose in the post of a Lecturer in Sanskrit in the institution. Due notice was given to the Commission by the management but no selection was made within the time specified in the statute. THErefore, the management took steps to fill up the post on ad-hoc basis. An advertisement was issued inviting applications. Candidates were interviewed. THE Committee of Management of the institution drew up a panel of three persons. In the panel the petitioner's name was put on the top. THE Committee of Management took this decision on 10th December, 1986 and on 12th December, 1986, the petitioner joined as a Lecturer in Sanskrit. THE District Inspector of Schools granted his approval to the appointment of the petitioner on 12th February, 1987. However, he made it clear that the appointment of the petitioner was to enure till a candidate duly selected by the Commission joined the post held by the petitioner or till 20th May, 1987, whichever event occurred earlier. THE petitioner is continuing to function as a Lecturer. However, he has not been paid any salary after 20th May 1987. THE respondents do not consider the petitioner to be in service after 20th May 1987, hence no salary has been paid to him with effect from 21st May 1987. THE Commission has not selected any candidate for permanent appointment as yet.

(3.) IT is an admitted position that no letter of appointment was ever issued to the petitioner by the management. IT is the petitioner's own case that he had been appointed as an ad-hoc Lecturer in accordance with section 18 of the U. P. Secondary Education Services Commission and Selection Board Act, 1982 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). This provision, in so far as material, inter-alia, provides that the management may appoint, by direct recruitment or promotion, a teacher on purely ad-hoc basis from amongst the persons possessing qualifications prescribed under the Intermediate Education Act, 1921 or the regulations made thereunder. So far as the appointment of an ad-hoc teacher is concerned there is no express provision either in the Act or in the Rules framed thereunder providing for the issue of a letter of appointment, yet the question is t Whether the petitioner was appointed as a Lecturer by the Management, Our answer is no.