1. Appointment of teachers — failure to appoint recommended candidates — appointment of ad hoc teachers — validity under U.P. Secondary Education Services Commission and Selection Board Act, 1982. (Para 1 )
Back
Next 
1996 Supreme(SC) 1016
1996(5) Supreme 497
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
K. Ramaswamy and G.B. Pattanaik, JJ.
J.A.S. Inter College, Khurja, U.P. & Ors. -Appellants
versus
State of U.P. & Ors. --Respondents
I.A. No. 3 In
Writ Petition No. 928 of 1992
Decided on 8-7-1996
Important Points
Ad hoc appointments of teachers not recommended by the Commission grant no right or equity. Under the U.P. Secondary Education Services Commission and Selection Board Act, 1982, such appointments are temporary and must be replaced by candidates selected and recommended by the Commission.
Subject
Education Law - Teacher Appointment
Act Referred
Headnote
SERVICE LAW-U.P Secondary Education Services Commission and Selection Board Act, 1982-Section 18-Writ Petition-No counter affidavit filed-This Court directed respondents to appoint 18 teachers as required by petitioners college within specified time-8 teachers selected by U.P. Secondary Education Service Commission were appointed-One of them had not joined service-Seven persons out of 18 have taken charge-11 candidates were not recommended for appointment by the Commission-These 11 teachers would be ad-hoc appointees pending disposal of writ petition-They would not and should not claim any right or equity pursuant to the said appointment. (Para 1)
Legal Category Hierarchy
-
administrative law
-
service law
-
public employment
- teacher appointments
-
public employment
-
service law
Table of Contents
2. Ad hoc appointments not made according to rules remain operative until recommended candidates join, the post expires, or the statutory date is reached. (Para 1 )
3. Ad hoc appointments under the U.P. Secondary Education Services Commission and Selection Board Act, 1982, cease upon the joining of recommended candidates or specified statutory dates. (Para 1 )
4. Ad hoc appointees must be replaced by candidates selected and recommended by the Commission in accordance with the Act. (Para 1 , 2 )
5. When does an ad hoc teacher's appointment cease under the U.P. Secondary Education Services Commission and Selection Board Act, 1982?
An ad hoc appointment ceases at the earliest of: when recommended candidates join the post, when the post expires, or on the 30th day of June following the appointment. (Para 1 )
6. Do ad hoc teachers appointed contrary to rules have any right or equity to the post?
No, ad hoc appointees who are appointed pending the disposal of a writ petition do not and should not claim any right or equity pursuant to such appointments. (Para 1 )
7. What is the status of ad hoc appointments that are not consistent with the Removal of Difficulties Order?
Such appointments, while not according to rules, remain operative until the statutory events for cessation occur or the pending writ petition is disposed of, subject to the final result. (Para 1 )
ORDER
It was mentioned in the order dated April 8, 1996 that in spite of adjournment of the case repeatedly, counter affidavit has not been filed. Consequently, this Court directed the respondents to appoint 18 teachers as required by the petitioners within the specified time. It is now the admitted position that eight teachers selected by the U.P. Secondary Education Service Commission were appointed. One of them had not joined the service. Consequently, seven persons out of 18 have taken charge. Resultantly, 11 candidates were not recommended for appointment by the Commission. The petitioner-college appears to have appointed 11 teachers. It would be obvious that these 11 teachers would be ad hoc appointees pending disposal of the writ petition and they would not and should not claim any right or equity whatsoever pursuant to the said appointment. Under sub-section (3) of Section 18 of the U.P Secondary Education Services Commission and Selection Board Act, 1982 (Act 5 of 1982), appointment of an ad hoc teacher under sub-sections (1) and (2) shall cease to have effect from the earliest of the dates mentioned therein, namely, (a) when the candidates recommended by the Commission or Board, as the case may be, join the post; (b) when the post of one month preferred to under sub-section (4) of Section 11 express; or (c) 30th day of June following the day of such ad hoc appointment. In that view, the ad hoc appointments though not consistent with Section 5 of the Ist Removal of Difficulties Order, 1981 and, therefore, not according to rules, would remain operative until either of the events occur. The said arrangements of ad hoc appointment, if the writ petition is disposed of earlier, would be subject to the result in the writ petition. In other words, the ad hoc appointees should be replaced by candidates selected by the Commission and recommended for appointment in accordance with the said Act.
2. The application is accordingly disposed of.
*******
