COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT B D BAJORIA INTER COLLEGE SAHARANPUR Vs. DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION SECONDARY U P LUCKNOW

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed against the Impugned order dated 11.2.99. 20.2.99 and 5.4.99 (Annexures-8, 8A and 14 to the writ petition) and for a mandamus restraining the respondents from appointing the respondent No. 5 as the Principal of B. D. Bajoria Inter College, Saharanpur.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner No. 1 is the Committee of Management of the institution in question and the petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 are permanent lecturers therein. The petitioner No. 2 was appointed as lecturer in English in the year 1965 while the petitioner No. 3 was appointed as lecturer in Chemistry in the 1966.

(3.) It is alleged in paragraph 4 of the petition that the work and conduct of the petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 has been satisfactory and there is no complaint or adverse entry against them. The petitioner No. 2 has done M.A. in English and M.A. in Political Science and has done B.Ed, and got 34 years of teaching experience. The petitioner No. 3 has done M.Sc. in Chemistry and has 33 years teaching experience. It is alleged that petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 are fully qualified and eligible for the post of Principal of an Intermediate College. In paragraph 7 of the petition it is alleged that the permanent Principal of the institution retired from service on 30.6.1993 and on that vacancy Shiv Prakash Sharma, the seniormost lecturer, was appointed as officiating Principal from 1.7.1993. In paragraph 9 of the petition it is alleged that the date of birth of the petitioner No. 2 is 1.1.1942. In paragraph 10 of the petition it is stated that Shiv Prakash Sharma attained the age of superannuation of 60 years and continued on extension till the end of the academic session and retired on 30.6.1999. In paragraph 11 of the petition it is alleged that the petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 are the next seniormost lecturers in the Institution in order of seniority. In paragraph 12 of the petition it is alleged that the petitioner Nos. 2 is at serial No. 2 immediately below Shiv Prakash Sharma while the petitioner No. 3 is at serial No. 3 Immediately below the petitioner No. 2. in paragraph 13 of the petition it is alleged that since Shiv Prakash Sharma was to retire on 30.6.99 an order was issued by the Manager of the institution on 19.5.99 directing Shiv Prakash Sharma to deliver charge of the office of principal to the petitioner No. 2. True copy of the order dated 19.5.99 is Annexure-1 to the petition. In paragraph 14 of the petition it is alleged that the U. P. Secondary Education Service Commission issued an advertisement which was published in the U. P. Rozgar Digest dated 20/26.12.1995 whereby applications were invited for the post of Principal of large number of educational institutions in the State Including the institution in question. True copy of the advertisement is Annexure-2 to the petition. The last date for submitting the application-form was 18.1.1996. The said advertisement contained a stipulation that the relevant date for computation of age and eligibility qualifications was the last date of submission of application forms. Pursuant to the advertisement selection proceedings were held by the Commission in which the petitioner was also considered as the seniormost lecturer in the institution. The result of the aforesaid selection was notified by the Commission by notification dated 15.4.1997. However, it is alleged in paragraph 18 of the petition that the panel notified on 15.4.1997 could not be immediately implemented on account of two interim orders of general application passed by the High Court being interim order dated 16.10.1996 passed in Special Appeal No. 180 of 1996 and Interim order dated 17.10.1996 passed by the learned single Judge in Writ Petition No. 33784 of 1996 vide Annexures-4 and 5 to the petition. Ultimately the Division Bench gave final judgment on 6.10.1998 (copy of which is Annexure-6 to the petition). The Division Bench held that since there were objections against the selected candidates that they did not possess the requisite qualifications for the post of Principal, such objection may be filed before the Director of Education who will decide it himself or through some Deputy Director nominated by him. In paragraph 20 of the petition it is stated that the State Government issued G.O. dated 7.1.1999 directing the implementation of the select list mentioned above subject to the decision of the Supreme Court. True copy of the G.O. dated 7.1.1999 is Annexure-7 to the petition. However. it was also directed that it should be ascertained whether the candidates possess the requisite qualification. Thereafter the D.I.O.S. Saharanpur. issued a letter dated 11.2.1999 recommending the name of the respondent No. 5 for appointment as the Principal of the institution In question. True copy of the letter of the D.I.O.S. dated 11.2.1999 is Annexure-8 to the petition which was followed by another letter dated 20.2.1999 vide Annexure-8A to the writ petition.