Hon’ble Dilip Gupta, J.—The petitioner, a Lecturer in “Sri Agrasen Kanya Inter College, Varanasi” (hereinafter referred to as the ‘College’), has sought the quashing of the order dated 20th November, 2007 passed by the Authorised Controller of the College as also the consequential order dated 6th December, 2007 passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Varanasi (hereinafter referred to as the ‘DIOS’) whereby by the former order, a direction has been given to Smt. Sangeeta Banerjee, Lecturer in the College, to discharge duties as Officiating Principal of the College and by the latter her signatures have been attested. The petitioner has also sought a direction upon the respondents not to disturb the working of the petitioner as the Officiating Principal of the College.

2. The regular Principal of the College retired in the year 2000 after attaining the age of superannuation. In the absence of regular Principal, Prem Lata Sinha, a Lecturer in the College, was appointed as the Officiating Principal of the College but as disciplinary proceedings were initiated against her by the Committee of Management, respondent No. 5 Sangeeta Banerjee was given the charge of Officiating Principal of the College by the order dated 20th March, 2005. However, she sent a communication dated 22nd March, 2006 to the Manager of the College expressing her inability on account of domestic circumstances to take charge of the Officiating Principal of the College. Gayatri Singh was thereafter asked to take charge of the Officiating Principal of the College by the communication dated 22nd March, 2006 and though she took charge of the Officiating Principal but subsequently expressed her inability to continue as the Officiating Principal of the College by the communication dated 20th May, 2006 in view of domestic circumstances. The petitioner was, thereafter, given charge of the Officiating Principal of the College by the order dated 20th June, 2006. However, the Manager of the College again gave the charge of the Officiating Principal to Sangeeta Banerjee, but she again expressed her inability to work as the Officiating Principal by the communication dated 25th June, 2006. The petitioner was thereafter asked to work as the Officiating Principal and her signatures were also attested by the DIOS by the order dated 24th July, 2006. On 20th November, 2007, however, the Authorised Controller of the College, who had since been appointed in the College, directed Sangeeta Banerjee to work as the Officiating Principal of the College in view of the application submitted by Sangeeta Banerjee and the fact that Sangeeta Banerjee was the senior most Lecturer in the College. On the basis of the said order, the DIOS by the order dated 6th December, 2007 attested the signatures of Sangeeta Banerjee as the Officiating Principal of the College. These two orders have been impugned in the present petition.

3. I have heard Sri M.M. Sahai, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri S.K. Pandey, learned counsel appearing for Sangeeta Banerjee and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that once Sangeeta Banerjee had declined to officiate as the Principal of the College, she could not subsequently be given charge of the Officiating Principal, particularly when the same substantive vacancy is continuing and in support of this contention he has placed reliance upon the judgments of this Court in Satya Vir Singh v. District Inspector of Schools, Bulandshahr and others, 1995 (1) AWC 122; Ashok Kumar Jain v. State of U.P. and others, (2008) 2 UPLBEC 1159 and upon the Division Bench judgment of this Court in Special Appeal No. 959 of 2006 (Sundershan Kumar v. State of U.P. and others) decided on 15th September, 2006.

5. Learned counsel appearing for Sangeeta Banerjee and the learned Standing Counsel, however, contended that mere refusal by Sangeeta Banerjee on two occasions to work as the Officiating P