Ad hoc appointments must comply with the prescribed appointment procedures to be eligible for regularisation under relevant provisions.

( 1 ) HEARD counsel for the appellant.

( 2 ) BY this appeal the appellant has challenged the order dated 5th November, 2003 passed by the learned Judge of this Court in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 14962 of 1988 by which the writ petition filed by the appellant has been dismissed. The appellant claimed to be appointed on ad hoc basis in C. T. grade in the substantive vacancy by the Committee of Management of Adarsh inter College, Aunti Gauri, Azamgarh. After making ad hoc appointment of the appellant in C. T. grade the Committee of Management forwarded all the papers for approval of the District inspector of Schools by letter dated 27. 4. 1988. The District Inspector of Schools then passed the order dated 11. 7. 1988 refusing to approve the ad hoc appointment of the petitioner on the ground that the ad hoc appointment was required to be made in accordance with the provisions of U. P. Secondary Education Service Commission (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 1981 but the process of selection was adopted by the Committee of Management hence the ad hoc appointment of the petitioner cannot be approved. The petitioner challenging the said order dated 11. 7. 1988 filed the writ petition in this Court in which interim order was granted by this Court. The writ petition came for hearing before the Court and it was dismissed on 5. 11. 2003. The learned Judge of this court observed in his judgment that the appointment of the appellant was disapproved by the district Inspector of Schools on the ground that even a C. T. grade teacher could be appointed on ad hoc basis only after following-the procedure of appointment under Paragraph 5 of the removal of Difficulties Order, 1981. Challenging the said order dated 5. 11. 2003 Dr. R. G. Padia, counsel for the appellant contended that the appellants case is fully covered by the provisions of Section 33a (1c) of the U. P. Secondary Education (Service Selection Boards)Act, 1982 and the appellant is entitled for being given regular appointment by virtue of the said provision ; hence the learned single Judge of this Court committed error in rejecting the writ petition. Learned counsel for the appellant has also placed reliance on two Division Bench judgments of this Court in Smt. Shashi Saxena and Ors. v. Deputy Director of Education and ors. . 2000 (4) AWC 2685 : 2000 (3) ESC 1999 (All) and District Inspector of Schools, Kanpur nagar and Ors. v. Diwakar Lal and Ors. , 2000 (3) AWC 2182 : 2000 (3) ESC 1670 (All ). He also relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in Karnataka State Private College Stop-Gap lecturers Association v. State of Karnataka and Ors. , AIR 1992 SC 677. The thrust of the submission of Dr. R. G. Padia is that the appellant is fully entitled by the aforesaid provisions of section 33a (1c) and he is entitled for regularisation and the learned Judge has wrongly rejected the writ petition. The provision for regularisation was to regularise every ad hoc appointment whether it was legal or illegal and since the case of the appellant is covered under Section 33a, the question as to whether his appointment is valid or not cannot be gone into.

( 3 ) WE have considered the submissions of Dr. R. G. Padia, counsel for the appellant and perused the record.

( 4 ) ON perusal of the writ petition it is clear that the appointment of the appellant was disapproved on the ground that the appellants appointment on ad hoc basis has been made without following the procedure of appointment under paragraph 5 of the Removal of Difficulties Order, 1981. The power to hold the selection for ad hoc appointment is given to the District Inspector of Schools and since the Committee of Management has made ad hoc appointment of the petitioner hence the ad hoc appointment of the appellant cannot be approved. Dr. Padia elaborating his submission said that the Regularisation Rule, i. e. , Section 33a (1c) only refers Rule 2 of the 1981 Order and do not refer to other rules hence only thing which was