MANGAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner through the present writ petition, challenges the orders dated 31.3.1993 passed by the District Inspector of Schools refusing to grant approval to the appointment of the petitioner as ad hoc Lecturer (Maths).

(2.) The petitioner was appointed in year 1980 as a Class IV employee in Inter College, Chandawall, Moradabad. The petitioner claims that he obtained Master of Science (Maths) and B.Ed. Degree. During the session 1983-84 for the first time, Science was made compulsory subject for High School classes. No teacher was available in the institution for teaching Science to High School classes and since the petitioner possessed the qualification of M.Sc. (Maths), the Committee of Management passed a resolution on 21.8.1983 to the effect that the post of Assistant Teacher in L.T. Grade be got created and teaching work of Science subject to High School classes be taken from the petitioner. Since then the petitioner is continuously teaching Science subject to High School classes, but he was paid salary only of Class IV employees. The Committee of Management made various representations for sanctioning and creation of the post of Assistant Teacher in L.T. grade for teaching Science subject in the Institution but nothing was done by the educational authorities for the creation of Post. Sri Raghubir Singh was the permanent lecturer (Maths) who was granted ad hoc promotion as principal of the Institution but he retired on 30.6.1991. Therefore, a substantive post of Lecturer (Maths) fell vacant in the Institution. The District Inspector of Schools recommended the name of Sri Ram Saran on 19.9.1992. It is alleged in the petition that the management issued appointment letter on 9.10.1992 to Sri Ram Saran for Joining the post but there is nothing on record to indicate that Sri Ram Saran joined. However, the Committee of Management on 5.1.1993 advertised the post of Lecturer (Maths). The petitioner was selected and was given appointment on 22.3.1993. He joined on 23.3.1993. The management forwarded the papers to the District Inspector of Schools for granting approval. On 31.3.1993 the District Inspector of Schools disapproved the appointment of the petitioner on the ground that the management had no power to make ad hoc appointment on substantive vacancy in view of the amendment made in Section 18 of the U. P. Secondary Education Service Commission and Selection Boards Act, 1981 as amended by U. P. Act No. 24 of 1992, w.e.f. 14.7.1992 (in brief Act).

(3.) Sri Ashok Khare, counsel for the petitioner argued that the substantive vacancy of Lecturer (Maths) occurred on 30.6.1991, therefore, the vacancy ought to have been filled as per the law prevailing at that time and the procedure prescribed by the Act which came into force on 14.7.1992 was not applicable. Any subsequent amendment in the Act or rules will not have any effect on the powers of the Committee of Management to make ad hoc appointment to fill vacancies which were existing or occurred prior to 14.7.1992. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on the case of Sultan Ahmad v. State of U. P. and others, 1983 AWC 86 and Jai Narain Singh and others v. State of U. P. and others. 1987 UPLBEC 308. In both the decisions, the Court on facts of those cases held that rules clearly provided that they would apply to vacancies which occurred when the rules came into force. Thus, these decisions do not help the petitioner.