High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Shashi Pal Rao v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. 53428 of 2004  RD-AH 17188 (4 October 2006)
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.53428 of 2004
Shashi Pal Rao ..... Petitioner
State of U.P & others ...... Respondent
Hon'ble Ashok Bhushan,J
Heard counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged and with the consent of the parties, the writ petition is being finally decided.
By this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 17.8.2004 passed by District Inspector of Schools refusing to approve the ad hoc appointment of the petitioner as ad hoc Lecturer(Economics) on the ground that U.P Secondary Education Service Commission (Removal of difficulties) (Second) order 1981 having been rescinded with effect from 25.1.1999, it is not possible to approve ad hoc appointment made on the short term vacancy.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that ad hoc appointment of the petitioner was made on 6.12.1998 and the information of the ad hoc appointment for approval was forwarded to the District Inspector of Schools on 7.12.1988 which was received by the District Inspector of Schools on 8.12.1998. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner's ad hoc appointment on short term vacancy having been made in accordance with (Removal of Difficulties) (Second) order 1981, the said ad hoc appointment shall not be affected in any manner by rescission of Difficulties Order on 25.1.1999. The counsel for the petitioner also submits that in view of the District Inspector of Schools having not communicated his decision within seven days, the ad hoc appointment shall be deemed to be approved. The learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent has supported the impugned order and has submitted that the Difficulties Order having been rescinded, the District Inspector of Schools has rightly refused to approve the ad hoc appointment.
I have considered the submissions of the counsel for the parties and perused the record. The case of the petitioner in the writ petition is that all proceedings pertaining to ad hoc appointment were completed on 6.12.1998 and the papers were also forwarded to the District Inspector of Schools by letter dated 7.12.1998 which were said to have been received in the office of the District Inspector of Schools on 8.12.1998. The ground No. 2 and 9 have specifically been taken that the District Inspector of Schools having failed to communicate his decision within seven days, the said ad hoc appointment shall be deemed to be approved.
The U.P Secondary Education Service Selection Board (Removal of difficulties) (Second) order 1981 were continuing till 25.1.1999 when they were rescinded. The case of the petitioner is that his ad hoc appointment stood deemed approved prior to 25.1.1999, hence his ad hoc appointment is not affected by the rescission of Difficulties Order on 25.1.1999. The District Inspector of Schools by the impugned order has refused to approve only on the ground of rescission of Difficulties Order with effect from 25.1.1999. The District Inspector of Schools has not adverted to the claim of the petitioner of ad hoc appointment on merits as well as not examined the case of the petitioner as to whether ad hoc appointment was made in accordance with the procedure prescribed under U.P Secondary Education Service Selection Board (Removal of difficulties) (Second) order 1981. The District Inspector of Schools has also not examined as to whether the ad hoc appointment should be treated to deemed to be approved prior to 25.1.1999. In event the ad hoc appointment was made prior to 25.1.1999 and all steps were completed prior to 25.1.1999, the rescission of Difficulties Orders can have no affect on the completed transaction made prior to 25.1.1999. The fact of rescission of Difficulties Order was that no ad hoc appointment could be made after 25.1.1999 nor any process of ad hoc appointment which had not been finalised can be continued. The District Inspector of Schools having not examined the claim on the merits, the ends of justice be served in setting aside the order dated 17.8.2004 passed by District Inspector of Schools and directing the District Inspector of Schools to consider the claim of the petitioner afresh and take an appropriate decision in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid direction.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.