Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT)
S C Agarwal, Yogeshwar Dayal
U. P. BASIC SHIKSHA PARISHAD AND ANOTHER, APPELLANT
VERSUS
HARI DEO MANI TRIPATHI AND OTHERS, RESPONDENT..
(CIVIL APPEALS NOS. 5279-82 OF 1992
WITH
DIRECTOR OF BASIC EDUCATION, U.P. AND OTHERS, APPELLANT
VERSUS
RAGHUNANDAN AND OTHERS, RESPONDENT..
Civil Appeals Nos. 5279-82 of 1992 with No. 5278 of 1992, decided on December 7, 1992
U.P. Basic Education Act - Promotion - Service of Board - All respondents in aforesaid appeals court appointed as untrained Assistant Teachers in Junior Basic Schools in Uttar Pradesh bet court years - There is no dispute about fact that they court temporarily appointed and court untrained at time of their appointments - During years petitioners in High Court respondents in present appeals filed writ petitions - They inter alia stated date of their initial appointments as teachers in Basic Schools in District which court in State of Uttar Pradesh Prasad sole respondent in civil appeal arising out who was appointed as Assistant Teacher in Basic School in District in Uttar Pradesh – Held, Date of orders for transfer are passed - Such person shall not be entitled to any compensation - Historically as court have noticed earlier untrained Assistant Teachers used to be employed when trained teachers court not available and untrained Assistant Teachers became trained Assistant Teachers only on their getting requisite certificate of training and from that date only they court treated as regular Assistant Teachers getting proper scale of pay meant for them - It is trained Assistant Teacher who alone was eligible for promotion to post of Headmaster - There court three scales even for trained Assistant Teachers and it was trained Assistant Teacher in highest scale who was eligible for being promoted as Headmaster - When the Rules came into force writ petitioners had by then become trained Assistant Teachers and as such Rule only date of appointment as trained Assistant Teacher in a substantive capacity is to be seen and not the date of appointment as untrained Assistant Teacher - Appeals allowed
JUDGMENT
YOGESHWAR DAYAL, J.-- special leave granted.
2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties the appeals themselves were heard and are now being disposed of. The relevant petitions are -- SLPs (C) Nos. 458, 459, 460 and 463 of 1992 arising out of a common judgment and order dated 7-3- 1991 passed by the learned Single Judge of the Allahabad High Court in Civil Writ Petitions Nos. 21168, 19861, 21169 of 1987 and 4685 of 1988 respectively as well as SLP (C) No. 6145 of 1992 arising out of a judgment and order dated 4-10-1991 passed by a Single Judge of the Allahabad High Court in Writ Petition No. 6648 (SS) of 1991.
3. For facility of reference we are dealing with facts arising in SLP (C) No. 458 of 1992. In this matter respondent concerned is Hari Deo Mani Tripathi. He was appointed as an untrained Assistant Teacher on 27-11-1963 and he obtained the certificate of training on or about 16- 8-1973.
4. In other civil appeals the names of the respondents, their dates of appointment and the dates of their obtaining the certificate of training am as under :
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Name Date of Date of
appointment obtaining
training
certificate
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Appeal arising
out of SLP (C)
No. 459 of 1992
1. Dinesh Pande 23-11-1961 11-3-1976
2. Hridayanand Singh 30-8-1 960 11-5-1976
3. Ram Nakshatara 16-2-1966 11-7-1975
Prakash
4. Madan Kishore Singh 7-2-1966 11-3-1976
5. Harihar Singh 18-8-1962 1-3-1969
Appeal arising
out of SLP (C)
No. 460 of 1992
1. Hari Prakash 18-3-1970 1-6-1975
2. Saleswar Singh 18-8-1964 11-8-1972
3. Smt Khudaiza Khatoon 20-3-1969 6-8-1973
4. Mohammed Yasin 3-12-1968 6-8-1973
5. Ram Nagina 14-9-1968 23-3-1973
6. Rai Mangal 2-11-1960 11-3-1976
Singh
Appeal arising
out of SLP (C)
No. 463 of 1992
Badri Prasad 23-11-1963 1970
Tripathi
Appeal arising
out of SLP (C) No.
6145 of 1992
1. Raghunandan 29-7-1960 1976
2. Krishna Gopal 1-8-1961 1970
3. Ram Sharan 27-1-1960 1972
4. Parmanowar Saknab Singh 10-6-1962 1976
5. Vishwamohar Nath 8-8-1962 1976
----------------------------------------------------------------------
5. All the respondents in the aforesaid appeals were appointed as untrained Assistant Teachers in the Junior Basic Schools in Uttar Pradesh (Primary Schools) between the years 1959 to 1966. There is no dispute about the fact that they were temporarily appointed and were untrained at the time of their appointments.
6. During the years 1987-1988 the petitioners in the High Court (respondents in the present appeals) filed writ petitions. They inter alia stated the date of their initial appointments as teachers in Basic Schools in District Deoria, which were under the Zila Parishad in the State of Uttar Pradesh, ~xcept Badri Prasad Tripathi, sole respondent in civil appeal arising out of SLP (C)No. 153 of 1992 who was appointed as Assistant Teacher in Basic School in Mirzapur District in Uttar Pradesh.
7. It was stated in the writ petition that in 1972 U.P. Basic Education Act (for short 1972 Act) came into force whereunder the U.P. Board of Basic Education (for short the Board) was constituted. It was also stated that as per Section 9 of the 1972 Act all the teachers working un
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
