2001 Supreme(All) 209
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
A. K. Yog, J.
YOGENDRA PAL SINGH - Appellant
Versus
DISTRICT INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS - Respondents
Civil Misc. Writ Petition 2600 Of 1998
Decided On : 03/01/2001
Ashok Khare, S.K.Srivastava
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the eligibility for promotion and regularisation of ad hoc teachers required five years of continuous teaching service on a regular/substantive basis, and the word 'regular' in the relevant rule meant 'in accordance with law'. The court also clarified that ad hoc service could not be considered for promotion under the rule.
Headnote:
Regularisation - Teacher Appointment - U. P. Intermediate Education Act, U. P. Secondary Education Services Commission Act, 1981, Payment of Salaries Act, 1971 - Section 33-B - The court discussed the provisions of U. P. Intermediate Education Act, U. P. Secondary Education Services Commission Act, 1981, and Payment of Salaries Act, 1971, particularly Section 33-B, which allowed for the regularisation of ad hoc teachers. The court interpreted the meaning of 'regular' and 'substantive appointment' in the context of the rules and regulations, and concluded that the eligibility for promotion required five years of continuous teaching service on a regular/substantive basis.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, who were assistant teachers in a college, sought the quashing of an order that refused to release their salary due to a dispute over their promotion and regularisation. The college was governed by the U. P. Intermediate Education Act, U. P. Secondary Education Services Commission Act, 1981, and Payment of Salaries Act, 1971. The petitioners had been appointed on an ad hoc basis and sought regularisation as per Section 33-B of the U. P. Secondary Education Services Commission Act, 1981.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the eligibility for promotion required five years of continuous teaching service on a regular/substantive basis, and the petitioners did not fulfill this requirement. The court also held that the word 'regular' in the relevant rule meant 'in accordance with law' and that the petitioners' ad hoc service could not be considered for promotion under the rule.
Issues: The issues revolved around the interpretation of the provisions of the U. P. Intermediate Education Act, U. P. Secondary Education Services Commission Act, 1981, and Payment of Salaries Act, 1971, particularly Section 33-B, and the eligibility criteria for promotion and regularisation of ad hoc teachers.
Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted the meaning of 'regular' and 'substantive appointment' in the context of the rules and regulations, and concluded that the eligibility for promotion required five years of continuous teaching service on a regular/substantive basis. The court also held that the word 'regular' in the relevant rule meant 'in accordance with law' and that the petitioners' ad hoc service could not be considered for promotion under the rule.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petition, finding no ground for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
( 1 ) YOGENDRA Pal Singh, Munish Kumar, Ajay Kumar Vishwas. Petitioners have approached this Court through this petition under Article 226 Constitution of india praying :
(i) to issue a writ to quash order dated January 12, 1998 passed by Accounts Officer, Office of district Inspector of Schools, Saharanpur/ Respondent No. 2 (Annexure-6 to the Writ Petition); whereby said authority refused to release salary of the Petitioners on the ground that promotion of the Petitioners in C. T. Grade was not in accordance with law inasmuch as they did not fulfil prescribed eligibility condition since they were regularised with effect from January 6,1993 (and the Petitioners had not completed five years of continuous substantive service in C. T Grade on the relevant date i. e. occurrence of vacancy);
(ii) to issue a suitable writ commanding the Respondents to permit the Petitioners to function as assistant Teacher in S. A. M. Inter College, Saharanpur and to pay their regular monthly salary, and
(iii) to issue a writ which this Court may deem flat and proper in the circumstances of the case. The contesting Respondents have filed Counter Affidavit. Petitioners have filed Rejoinder affidavit.
( 2 ) HEARD, learned Counsel for the Petitioners as well as the learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 2, Shri S. K. Srivastava, Advocate represen- ting Respondent No. 3 and perused the record. S. A. M. Inter College, Saharanpur, called the college a private managed Government aided recognized educational institution, is governed by the provisions of U. P. Intermediate Education act, U. P. Seconday Education Services Commission Act, 1981 and Payment of Salaries Act, 1971. Three Assistant Teachers (C. T. Grade), namely, Ramesh Chand Sharma, Mangal Ram Verma and Vijay Pal Bhatnagar were accorded ad-hoc promotion as Assistant Teachers (L. T. Grade) in the College and. consequently, short term vacancy occurred on three posts of Assistant Teacher (C. T. Grade) held by aforementioned three persons.
( 3 ) MANAGEMENT of the College made ad hoc appointment on aforesaid three posts of Assistant teacher (C. T. Grade) against short-term vacancy through direct selection and these Petitioners joined their posts (as Assistant Teacher C. T. Grade) with effect from January 5, 1989. On january 16, 1989 the then District Inspector of Schools approved ad-hoc appointments of the petitioners in C. T. Grade initially upto March 15, 1989 (Annexure-1 to the Writ Petition ). This appointment was subsequently extended upto April 30, 1989 vide order dated March 28, 1989 (Annexure-2 to the Writ Petition ). Adhoc appointment was again extended by the then District inspector of Schools vide order dated May 12, 1989 to continue till vacancy was converted into substantive vacancy or filled by regular promo- tion/selection through Commission (Annexure-3 to the Writ Petition ). Vide U. P. Act No. 1 of 1993, Section 33-B was incorporated in the U. P. Secondary Education services Commission Act, 1981 with effect from August 7, 1993. As a consequence thereof certain ad hoc teachers, like the Petitioners working between May 13, 1989 and May 14, 1991 were accorded benefit of regularisation as contemplated therein.
( 4 ) IN the light of Section 33-B management passed resolution dated January 26, 1995 and extended benefit of regularisation to the Petitioners, as Assistant Teacher (C. T. Grade) and the same was approved by the Deputy Director of Education vide letter dated January 16, 1995 addressed to the Manager of the College (Annexure-4 to the Writ Petition ). Petitioners thus continued to work as Assistant Teachers (C. T. Grade ). Three posts of Assistant teachers in L. T. Grade in the College meanwhile fell vacant on June 30, 1995 due to retirement of certain persons (namely, Nawab Anwar, Sukh Pal Singh and M. R. Verma ). It is also not disputed that these three posts of Assistant Teacher (L. T Grade) were under 50% promotional quota and required to be filled by promo