High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Ram Avadh Yadav v. D.I.O.S & Others - WRIT - A No. - 5973 of 1991  RD-AH 16896 (25 October 2007)
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Court No. 33
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 5973 of 1991
Ram Awadh Yadav
District Inspector of Schools and others
Hon'ble V.K. Shukla,J.
Ram Awadh Yadav, claiming himself to be appointed as Assistant Teacher in C.T. Grade at Navjeevan Inter College, Patherwa, District Deoria has filed present writ petition questioning the validity of the order dated 28.02.1989 passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Deoria refusing to accord recognition to the adhoc appointment of the petitioner as Assistant Teacher in C.T. Grade.
Brief background of the case is that one Babu Nandan Pandey who had been performing and discharging duties as C.T. Grade, died in October 1988 and on account of his death, a substantive vacancy has been occurred. It has been contended that said vacancy in question was intimated to the District Inspector of Schools on 10.10.1988 and as no Board has been constituted for selection of the C.T. Grade teacher under U.P. Act No. V of 1982, as such Committee of Management of the institution had proceeded with the process of selection and thereafter in term of the provision as contained under Section 18(1)(b) of U.P. Act No. V of 1982 selection was undertaken and thereafter papers were transmitted to the District Inspector of Schools for according approval to the said appointment. District Inspector of Schools has refused to accord recognition to the adhoc appointment of the petitioner as Assistant Teacher in C.T. Grade on account of the fact that C.T. grade teacher has been declared as dying cadre.
Counter affidavit has been filed disputing the genuinity of the appointment of the petitioner.
Rejoinder affidavit has been filed rebutting the statement of fact mentioned in the counter affidavit.
After pleadings mentioned above have been exchanged present writ petition has been taken up with the consent of the parties for final hearing and disposal.
Sri R.C. Dwivedi, learned counsel for the petitioner contended with vehemence that the very foundation and basis of passing of the order is unsustainable and since year 1988 up till date petitioner is regularly and continuously performing and discharging his duties as such writ petition deserves to be allowed.
Learned Standing counsel on the other hand contended that appointment of the petitioner itself has not been made in accordance with law, as such petitioner is not entitled for any relief.
After respective arguments have been advanced, factual position which is emerging is to the effect that petitioner claims to have been appointed on ad hoc basis as C.T. Grade teacher vide resolution dated 28.02.1989 passed by Committee of Management and thereafter papers were transmitted to the District Inspector of Schools for according recognition to the adhoc appointment of the petitioner as Assistant Teacher in C.T. Grade. District Inspector of Schools has proceeded to pass order on 21.02.1991 taking view that as per Government Order C.T. Grade has been declared dying cadre and C.T. Grade has been converted in to L.T. Grade, as such it is not feasible to accord financial concurrence to the said appointment.
This Court in the case of Braj Bihari Lal Nigam Vs. Committee of Management and another reported in 2006 (2) SAC 554 has taken the view that once appointment has been made in C.T. Grade much prior to declaration of C.T. Grade as dying cadre then District Inspector of Schools cannot refuse to accord financial approval on the said ground.
In the present case also undisputedly appointment of the petitioner is alleged to have been made on 28.02.1989 i.e. prior to the date when C.T. Grade has been declared dying cadre on 11.08.1989. In this background order passed on 21.02.1991 based on the same, in view of the judgment quoted above is unsustainable.
Under the interim order passed by this Court petitioner claims that he is continuing to discharge his duties and also received his salary, as such petitioner claims that he is liable to be regularised.
Various provisions have been introduced in U.P. Act No. V of 1982 for extending the benefit of regularization, in these circumstances and in this background respondents are directed to consider the claim of the petitioner for extending the benefit of regularization, in accordance with law and at the time when authority concerned proceeds to consider the claim of the petitioner for regularization validity of the adhoc appointment of the petitioner be also examined and tested as to whether appointment of the petitioner has been made in accordance with law or not as till date validity of the appointment has not been examined and on the strength of interim order petitioner has reaped all the benefits.
Consequently, order impugned passed by District Inspector of Schools, Deoria, is hereby quashed. Writ petition is allowed and disposed of.
25th October, 2007
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.