SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1996 Supreme(All) 1281

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
M. Katju, J.
AWADHESH PANDEY - Appellant
Versus
DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, IVTH REGION - Respondents
Civil Misc. Writ Petition 22214 Of 1996
Decided On : 11/15/1996

Advocates Appeared:
G.S.D.Mishra

The senior most teacher is entitled to work as ad hoc principal, and a fresh option to retire at a later age can change the retirement date.

Headnote:

Ad Hoc Principal - Seniority Dispute - The petitioner, as the senior most teacher, is entitled to work as ad hoc principal in accordance with the court's judgment. The fact that he had declined the post in 1979 does not preclude him from being appointed as ad hoc principal in 1995. Additionally, the petitioner's fresh option to retire at the age of 60 years entitles him to continue as principal till 30-6-1998.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, as the senior most teacher, claimed entitlement to work as ad hoc principal. The respondent contested based on the petitioner's earlier decline of the principal post in 1979 and retirement age.

Finding of the Court:

The court allowed the writ petition, granting the petitioner the right to continue as ad hoc principal until 30-6-1998.

Issues: Dispute over entitlement to the ad hoc principal position based on seniority and retirement age.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioner's earlier decline of the principal post in 1979 does not preclude him from being appointed as ad hoc principal in 1995. Additionally, the petitioner's fresh option to retire at the age of 60 years entitles him to continue as principal till 30-6-1998.

Final Decision: The writ petition is allowed, and the petitioner is allowed to continue functioning as ad hoc principal of the institution until 30-6-1998.

M. KATJU, J.

( 1 ) THIS writ petition as well as connected writ petition Nos. 32617 of 1996, and 11221 of 1996 are being disposed of by a common judgment.

( 2 ) THE controversy in these writ petitions as to who is entitled to be ad hoc principal of Sri Annu rai Intermediate College, Ballia. Admittedly the petitioner was the senior most teacher in the institution and hence in accordance with the judgment of this Court in Radha Raizada v. District inspector of Schools and Ors. , 1994 (3) UPLBEC 1551, he is entitled to work as ad hoc principal. The contention of Sri Abhay Narain Singh was that the petitioner Awadhesh Pandey had declined to be the principal in 1979. However, subsequently when the post of principal again fell vacant on the retirement of the out going principal on 30-6-1995, the petitioner Awadesh pandey was entitled to be appointed as ad hoc principal. The fact that he had declined the post in 1979 cannot be a good ground for refusing him the post in 1995. In fact this controversy has already been decided writ petition No. 21821 of 1995 Awadesh Pandey v. D. T. O. S. and Ors. , which was allowed by Honble R. A. Sharma, J. on 12-2-1996. Hence this controversy cannot be raised again.

( 3 ) THE Awadhesh Pandey has already retired. It is true that earlier he had given the option to retire at the age of 58 years. He was born on 19-1-1938 and he would have retired on 30-6-1996 i. e. at the end of the session. However, he moved a fresh option on 5-1-1991 withdrawing his earlier option and opting to retire at the age of 60 years. A Division Bench of this Court in special Appeal No. 482 of 1993 decided on 20-12-1993, Smt. Kamla Sharma v. Deputy Director education and Ors. has held that the option can be changed at any time before the retirement. Hence the petitioner Awdesh Pandey having given the fresh option to retire at the age of 60 years is entitled to continue as principal till 30-6-1998.

( 4 ) HENCE, this writ petition is allowed. The petitioner shall be allowed to. continue functioning at ad hoc principal of the institution in question till 30-6-1998. Regarding the seniority of the other teachers, I am not deciding it at this stage.


.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top