Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

VEER SINGH versus REGIONAL JOINT DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Veer Singh v. Regional Joint Director Of Education & Others - WRIT - A No. 10402 of 2002 [2006] RD-AH 11910 (20 July 2006)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

COURT NO.26

CIVIL MISC. WRIT PETITION NO. 10402 OF 2002

Veer Singh

Versus

Regional Joint Director of Education and others.

HON. SHISHIR KUMAR, J.

By means of the present writ petition the petitioner has approached this Court for issuing a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 28.2.2002, annexure-14 to the writ petition passed by respondent no.1. Further prayer is for issuing a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to treat the petitioner eligible for the post of Lecturer in Geography and approve the promotion of the petitioner.

The petitioner was initially appointed as CT Grade teacher on 15.1.1982. Thereafter the petitioner was granted LT Grade after completion of 10 years of service on 15.1.1992. The services of the petitioner were regularized w.e.f. 6.4.1991. At the time of the appointment of the petitioner, the qualification of the petitioner was B.A. B.Ed. and subsequently, the petitioner passed Post Graduate Examination M.A. in Economics in 1993 and M.A. in Geography in 1999. The petitioner has passed in M.A. Geography on 30.6.1999 on which date the mark- sheet was issued in favour of the petitioner. One Bishambhar Singh who was working as permanent lecturer in Geography was selected by the Commission for the post of Principal of the institution and he joined the said post on 29.4.1998. The appointment of Sri Bishambhar Singh as a Principal of the institution was made initially on probation for a period for one year. Copy of the said letter has been annexed as Annexire-4 to the writ petition. The period of probation was extended for a further period of six months and he was confirmed on the post of Principal on 28.10.1999.

It has been submitted that till the confirmation of Sri Bishambar Singh on the post of Principal of the institution he was having the lien on the said post, therefore, it cannot be said that the post of Lecturer Geography was vacant. Actually it fell vacant substantively on 28.10.1999. The petitioner is a senior most L.T. Grade teacher in the institution as such he was fully qualified to be promoted to the post of Lecturer in Geography which is apparent from the seniority list dated 4.1.1999. The petitioner submitted an application for his regular promotion on the post of Lecturer on 14.7.1999 and the said application of the petitioner was forwarded by the Principal. On 16.7.1999 the Principal of the institution has forwarded the papers pertaining to the regular promotion of the petitioner on the post of Lecturer Geography to the District Inspector of Schools. Copy of the same has been filed as Annexure-8 to the writ petition. It has further been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that for the purpose of regular promotion on the post of Lecturer the U.P. Secondary Education Service Selection Board Rules 1998 is applicable. Rule 14 of the 1998 Rules says about the promotion of lecturer from LT Grade. According to Rule 14 if a LT Grade teacher has completed 5 years of continuous service on the first date of recruitment year, he is entitled for promotion on Lecturer Grade. Since the petitioner was having a requisite qualification as required and has also completed 5 years of continuous service in LT Grade on the first date of recruitment i.e. 1.7.1999, as such the petitioner was fully eligible to be promoted on the post of Lecturer Geography in view of the Rule 14 of 1998 Rules. The papers relating to the promotion of the petitioner were forwarded by the District Inspector of Schools to the Joint Director of Education for passing appropriate orders. The Joint Direction of Education made certain quarries and the same were also answered. In spite of that each and every record was before the respondent, the respondent no.1 by order dated 28.2.2002, Annexure-14 to the writ petition has rejected the claim of the petitioner.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that a finding to this effect has been recorded by respondent no.1 that on the date when Sri Bishambhar Singh was selected for the post of Principal, i.e. 24.4.1998, the petitioner was not eligible to be considered for the post of promotion, as the petitioner was not having the requisite qualification on the said date. The petitioner submits that the said finding recorded by the respondent no.1 is wholly illegal and contrary to the Rule 14 of 1998 Rules. The eligibility criteria is to be seen on the date of vacancy and on the date of vacancy the petitioner was having the qualification to be promoted on the post of lecturer as on the said date the petitioner had passed the M.A. Examination Geography on 30.6.1999. It is not the case or the respondents that on the date when the Principal of the institution are selected by the Commission was made confirmed, on the said date, the petitioner was not having the requisite qualification to be promoted on the post of lecturer. Reliance has been placed upon the judgment of this Court reported in 2005 ADJ 266 (All.) Smt. Suman Bhatnagar Vs. State of U.P. and others.

A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents. The respondents wanted to justify the order passed by respondent no.1 that as on the date when the vacancy had taken place on the basis of the selection of Sri Bishambar Singh on the post of Principal; the petitioner was not qualified. Therefore his claim has rightly been rejected.

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the standing counsel and perused the record. From the record it is clear that Sri Bishambar Singh was selected by the Commission and Joined the post of Principal on 29.4.1998 on probation for a period of one year and subsequently the probation period was extended for a period of six months and he was made confirmed on 28.10.1999 on the post of Principal. It is well settled that unless and until a person is made confirmed on the higher post or another post, the lien of that person on the earlier post will not come to an end. As Sri Bishambar Singh had lien on the post of lecturer Geography, therefore, it cannot be said that there was a vacancy on 24.04.1998. It cannot be said that the petitioner was not having the requisite qualification to be promoted on the post of lecturer. The finding to this effect recorded by respondent no.1 that the date of vacancy would be treated as 24.4.1998 is not acceptable because that is not the date when Sri Bishambar Singh was confirmed on the post of Principal. Admittedly when the substantive vacancy has taken place immediately after the confirmation of Sri Bishambar Singh on the post of Principal i.e. 28.10.1999, the petitioner was having the requisite qualification for the post of Lecturer Geography. As such in my opinion, the order passed by respondent no.1 cannot be sustained and is liable to be quashed.

In view of the aforesaid fact, the order passed by respondent no.1 dated 28.2.2002, Annexure-14 to the writ petition is hereby quashed and respondent no.1 is directed to pass an appropriate order in the light of observation made hereinabove, considering the case of the petitioner for promotion on the post of Lecturer Geography, treating the petitioner to be qualified, as expeditiously as far as possible preferably within a period of two months from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order before him.

With these observations the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs

20.7.2006

V.Sri/-


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.