High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
C/M Hira Devi Tota Ram Girls Intermediate College v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. 23660 of 2004  RD-AH 3658 (29 September 2005)
Writ Petition No.23660 of 2004
Committee of Management of Hira Devi Tota Ram Girls Intermediate College, Moradabad Vs. State of U.P.& others
Writ Petition No.27029 of 2004
Indrajeet Singh Vs. State of U.P.& others
Writ Petition No.39308 of 2005
Committee of Management of Hira Devi Tota Ram Girls Intermediate College, Moradabad and another Vs. State of U.P.& others
These three writ petitions arise out of a common cause of action in the sense that all the three writ petitions pertain to the claim of Sri Indrajeet Singh, to continue to function as Asstt. clerk in the Institution known as Hira Devi Tota Ram Girls Intermediate College, Bahjoi ,district Moradabad, which an Institution recognized and governed by the provisions of U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921.
All the three writ petitions have been heard together . Sri Anil Bhushan has been heard for the petitioner Committee of Management in writ petition No.23660 of 2004 and Sri Irshad Ali holding brief of Sri M.A.Qadeer for the respondent no.5 Indrajeet Singh, and learned standing counsel for the rest of the respondents. Sri Khalil Ahmad Ansari has been heard on behalf of the Principal of the Institution. Sri Irshad Ali has been heard for Indrajeet Singh as the petitioner in writ petition No.27029 of 2004 and as respondent in the writ petition No.39308 of 2004.
The post was being claimed by one Late Sri Ramesh Chandra Varshney, whose appointment on the post in question became subject matter of controversy, and ultimately reached this court in writ petition No.16292 of 1988 filed by late Sri Ramesh chandra Varshney himself . The challenge in the said writ petition was to the termination of the service of Ramesh Chandra Varshney by the Administrator of the College, who was functioning as the Management under section 16 D of the U.P.Intermediate Education Act, 1921 It was alleged by Ramesh Chandra Varshney, that his termination was invalid, as it was not preceded by any prior approval of the Regional Inspectress of Girls Schools,/ Distt. Inspector of Schools. This court held that the order of termination of Ramesh Chandra Varshney was in operative, and found him entitled to continue in service and also payment of salary. A copy of the judgment dated 12.12.2003 has been appended as Annexure XIII to the writ petition. An important fact which requires to be noted at this juncture is that Ramesh Chandra Varshney had attained the age of superannuation during the pendency of the said writ petition on 31.7.2002 itself. The writ petition was finally heard, and judgment was reserved by this court on 14.11.2003. The petitioner therein Ramesh Chandra Varshney died on 22.11.2003. These facts have not been referred to in the judgment which came to be delivered on 12.12.2003. It appears, that the fact of his death, after the judgment was reserved could not be brought to the notice of this court. However, the death of the petitioner, after the judgment was reserved, would not make much of a difference, as such a delivery of judgment stands saved, in law, as held by the Apex court in the case of N.P.Thirugnanam Vs. Dr. R.Jagan Mohan Rao and others ,reported in A.I.R.1996 S.C. 116. The judgment dated 12.12.2003has been neither put to challenge nor is in jeopardy as admitted by the learend counsel for the parties.
Coming to the facts of the appointment of Indrajeet Singh respondent no.5, it is to be noted that the appointment of Indrajeet Singh vide order dated 25.8.1992 was subject to the decision of the writ petition of Ramesh Chandra varshney, as is evident from a perusal of Annexure I to the writ petition, which is a letter of appointment issued by the Administrator of the College. This is further substantiated by the order of the Regional Inspectress of Girls Schools, contained in Annexure II to the writ petition, which also clearly states that the appointment of Indrajeet Singh is to subsist and shall abide by, according to the decision of the Hon'ble High Court in the pending writ petition. Thus there is no room for doubt that the appointment of Indrajeet Singh was dependent on the outcome of the writ petition filed by Ramesh Chandra Varshney .
It is true, that Indrajeet Singh continued to function and receive his salary. He also made a move to get his services declared permanent and confirmed, and he also succeeded in getting the order from the Distt. Inspector of Schools to this effect. It is these orders, which have been challenged by the petitioner committee of Management through its present Manager Sri Bhanu Prakash and a prayer has been made for quashing the same. Annexure X to the writ petition is the confirmation order of Indrajeet Singh, which was passed on the ground, that Indrajeet Singh had already completed his probationary period of one year on 27.8.1993. This was followed by another order permitting the said Indrajeet Singh to join the Provident fund scheme and allocation of G.P.F. account no in his favour. This order has also been challenged by the Committee of Management Subsequently, orders dated 4.6.2004 and 17.5.2004 were passed by the Distt. Inspector of Schools, Moradabad, treating Indrajeet Singh entitled to continue in the Institution with a further rider that the parties shall appear before the Distt. Inspector of Schools with their objections in this respect. The Distt. Inspector of Schools passed an order directing the petitioner committee of Management to permit Indrajeet Singh to continue on the post and submit his salary bills, which has triggered off this litigation
The principal ground of challenge to the aforesaid orders is founded on the impact of the judgment dated 12.12.2003 in writ petition No. 16292 of 1988 referred to herein above.
Having heard the learned counsel for the parties,it is evident that the appointment of Indrajeet Singh was clearly dependent on the outcome of the writ petition, which was ultimately allowed on 12.12.2003. This writ petition was filed challenging the impugned orders and this court on 6.7.2004 refused to grant any interim order and issued a direction that Indrajeet Singh - respondent no.5 shall be allowed to continue in the Institution and shall also be paid his salary regularly. Against the order dated 6.7.2004 the petitioner Committee of Management preferred special Appeal no. 870 of 2004 in which the operation of the interim order dated 6.7.2004 passed in the instant writ petition was stayed until further orders. The said Special appeal is reported to be still pending and the interim order continues to operate.
During the pendency of this writ petition, the committee of Management was superseded and an authorised controller was appointed on 23.2.2005 to manage the Institution. The Committee of Management challenged the said order in which an interim order was passed in favour of the Committee on 15.3.2005 staying the operation of the order dated 23.2.05 as a result whereof , the committee of Management continued to function. However, taking advantage of the time gap between the order dated 23.2.2005 and the interim order dated 15.3.2005, the Authorised controller passed an order dated 11.3.2005 virtually continuing Indrajeet Singh- respondent and reinstating him in service. The Distt. Inspector of Schools passed an order dated 1.4.2005 in favour of Indrajeet Singh for his continuance and payment of salary .
Indrajeet Singh had filed a writ petition no.27029 of 2004 praying for a mandamus permitting him to discharge his duties and payment of salary. This court on 4.8.2004 passed an order of status quo with regard to the service of Indrajeet Singh as on the date of the passing of the said interim order. The Committee of Managemnt filed Special Appeal No. 1053 of 2004 against the interim order and the operation of the order was stayed by the said appellate Bench on 26.8.2004. The said Special appeal is pending and interim order continues to operate
Thus from the conspectus of the aforesaid facts, it is evident that Indrajeet Singh was prevented from functioning in the Institution in terms of the judgment of this court dated 12.12.2003.
The Committee of Management has filed the writ petition No.39308 of 2005 challenging the orders dated 14.3.2005 and 21.4.2005 referred to herein above , whereby the Authorised controller and Distt.Inspector of Schools had passed orders in favour of Indrajeet Singh. This court vide interim order dated 13.5.2005 kept the said orders in abeyance and which order still continues to be in force.
The simple question, therefore, is with regard to the status of Indrajeet Singh as on date. Indrajeet Singh is no longer entitled to continue due to the direct impact of the judgment dated 12.12.2003, inasmuch as the very letter of appointment and subsequent approval in favour of Indrajeet Singh referred to herein above was dependent on the result of the writ petition, which came to be decided on 12.12.2003. As a consequence thereof, the post was not available for appointment as the termination of Late Ramesh Chandra Varshney on the post in question was held to be invalid. Late Sri Ramesh Chandra Varshney , therefore, shall be deemed to be continuing on the post and the same could be filled up only upon his having attained the age of superannuation, which took place on 31.7.2002. Thus, there was no vacancy available so as to treat the appointment of Indrajeet Singh as a permanent appointment. His appointment was, therefore, brought to an end automatically with the judgment of this court dated 12.12.2003. No submissions were advanced on behalf of Indrajeet Singh, which could persuade this court to take a different or any other view.
Accordingly, the impugned orders dated 20.9.2003 and consequential order dated 1.10.2003 as also the orders dated 14.6.20045 and 17.6.2004 are unsustainable in law as they are in the teeth of the judgment of this court dated 12.12.2003 and the said orders are hereby quashed ,
In view of the quashing of the aforesaid orders, the orders dated 11.3.2005 and 21.4.2005 impugned in the writ petition No. 39308 of 2005 also fall through and hereby set aside. As a consequence of the aforesaid orders, the writ petition no. 27029 of 2004 fails and is hereby dismissed.
The Committee of Management shall now be entitled to fill up the post in accordance with the Rules and in case Indrajeet Singh applies for the said post, he shall also be considered for appointment on the post in question, if the said post is available to be filled up by direct recruitment.
All the writ petitions are accordingly disposed of.
Dt. September , 2005
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.