Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

RAVI SHANKAR versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Ravi Shankar v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. 13869 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 4445 (14 March 2007)

 

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. 39

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 13869 of 2007

Ravi Shankar

Versus

State of U.P. and others.

Hon'ble V.K. Shukla,J.

Petitioner has approached this court questioning the validity of the order dated 24.2.2007 passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Bulandshahar.

Earlier inter se  parties dispute had traveled  upto this court in the shape of Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.7513 of 2002 Shyam Babu Sharma Vs. D.I.O.S., Bulandshahar and others. This Court on 11.10.2006 allowed the writ petition and clearly held that reservation roster  is not applicable in the present case and all other things will be adjusted as per eligibility criteria laid down under Rule 14 of U.P. Secondary Education Services Selection Board, Rules, 1998. Thereafter, District Inspector of Schools, Bulandshahar on 24.2.2007 has passed order holding therein that Shyam Babu Sharma is senior in Lecturer grade and is eligible for being promoted as Lecturer in Economics and as such papers qua Shyam Babu Sharma be transmitted.

At this juncture Rules, 14 of U.P. Secondary Education Services Selection Board, Rules, 1998 is being looked into and quoted below:-

14. Procedure for recruitment by promotion-(1) Where any vacancy is to be filled by promotion all teachers working in trained graduates grade or certificate of Training grade, if any, who possess the qualification prescribed for the post and  have completed five years continuous regular service as such on the first day of the year of recruitment shall be considered for promotion to the lecturers grade or the trained graduates grade, as the case may be, without their having applied for the same.

Note- For the purposes of this sub-rule, regular service rendered in any other recognized institution shall be counted for eligibility unless interrupted by removal dismissal or reduction to lower post.

(2) The criterion for promotion shall be seniority subject to the rejection of unfit.

(3) The Management shall prepare a list of teachers referred to in  sub-rule (1), and forward it to the Inspector with a copy of seniority list, service records, including the character rolls, and a statement in the proforma given in Appendix-A.

(4) Within three weeks of the receipt of the list from the Management under sub-rule (3), the Inspector shall verify the facts from the record of his office and forward the list to the Joint Director.

(5) The Joint Director shall consider the cases of the candidates on the basis of the records referred to in sub-rule (3) and may call for such additional information as it may consider necessary. The Joint Director shall place the records before the Selection Committee referred to in subsection (1) of Section 12 and after the Committee's recommendation, shall forward the panel of selected candidates within one month to the Inspector with a copy thereof to the Management.

(6) Within ten days of the receipt of the panel from the Joint Director under sub-rule (5) the Inspector shall send the name of the selected candidates to the Management of the institution which has notified the vacancy and the Management shall accordingly on authorization under its resolution issue the appointment order in the proforma given in Appendix 'F' to such candidate.

 A bare perusal of aforementioned Rules would go to show that where any vacancy is to be filled by promotion all teachers working in trained graduates grade or certificate of Training grade, if any, who possess the qualification prescribed for the post and  have completed five years continuous regular service as such on the first day of the year of recruitment  has to be considered for promotion to the lecturers grade or the trained graduates grade, as the case may be, without their having applied for the same. Criteria for promotion provided for is seniority subject to the rejection of unfit as per sub-rule (2) of Rule 14. Sub- rule (3) of Rule 14 provides that the Management shall prepare a list of teachers referred to in  sub-rule (1), and forward it to the Inspector with a copy of seniority list, service records, including the character rolls, and a statement in the proforma given in Appendix-A. Sub-rule (4) of Rule 14  provides that within three weeks of the receipt of the list from the Management under sub-rule (3), the Inspector shall verify the facts from the record of his office and forward the list to the Joint Director.  Sub- rule (5) of Rule 14  provides that the Joint Director shall consider the cases of the candidates on the basis of the records referred to in sub-rule (3) and may call for such additional information as it may consider necessary. The Joint Director  thereafter has to  place the records before the Selection Committee referred to in subsection (1) of Section 12 and after the Committee's recommendation, has to forward the panel of selected candidates within one month to the Inspector with a copy thereof to the Management. Sub -rule (6) of Rule 14 provides that within ten days of the receipt of the panel from the Joint Director under sub-rule (5) the Inspector shall send the name of the selected candidates to the Management of the institution which has notified the vacancy and the Management shall accordingly on authorization under its resolution issue the appointment order in the proforma given in Appendix 'F' to such candidate.

On the touchstone of the provision quoted above, now present fact of the present  case is being adverted to. Even this court on the earlier occasion had mentioned that reservation roster is not applicable in the present case  however all other things shall be considered, as per eligibility criteria as laid down under Rule 14 of 1998 Rules.

Distrinct Inspector of Schools has asked Prabandh Sanchalak to forward entire papers qua Shyam Babu Sharma whereas entire papers are to be transmitted strictly as per Rule 14. Papers will have to be forwarded of each and every trained graduate grade teacher, who possess qualification prescribed  and who has completed five years continuous regular services on the  first day of year of recruitment without having applied for the same. Consequently Prabandha Sanchalak  is directed to transmit entire papers in consonance with the provision as contained under Rule 14  for the post of Lecturer in Economics and thereafter matter of grant of promotion be  considered strictly as per Rule 14. Further  in case post of lecturer in Civics has to be also filled up by way of promotion, then qua the same similar exercise be also undertaken.

With these observations, writ petition is disposed of.

Dt. 14.3.2007

T.S.

                                                                                                 


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.