By the Court.—This is an Appeal questioning the correctness of the judgment of the learned single Judge dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant and upholding the order of the District Inspector of Schools dated 7.8.2010.

2. The appellant was appointed as an Assistant Teacher in Baba Vasudev Das Inter College, Alinagar, District Sant Kabir Nagar, on ad hoc basis on account of a short term vacancy having arisen due to the permanent incumbent of the post Sri Dashrath Prasad upon being promoted as ad hoc Principal. The said Sri Dashrath Prasad was promoted w.e.f. 1.7.1996 where after he functioned as ad hoc Principal and his resultant vacancy, which was a short term vacancy, came to be filled up by the ad hoc appointment of the appellant.

3. The appellant had earlier filed a writ petition, being Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 9672 of 2002, which was disposed of on 23.1.2004 and in pursuance of the said judgment the District Inspector of Schools passed orders on 29.5.2004 ensuring payment of salary to the appellant. The appellant was continuing in service as an ad hoc teacher and accordingly received salary.

4. Sri Dashrath Prasad, who was working as ad hoc Principal, and against whose substantive post the appellant had been appointed as Assistant Teacher, superannuated on 30.6.2008. The effect thereof was that the vacancy, against which the appellant had been appointed, stood converted into a substantive vacancy w.e.f. 1.7.2008 onwards.

5. It appears that on certain directions issued by the State Government information was collected by the District Inspector of Schools, including the information in relation to the continuance of the appellant against the post on which he was appointed. The District Inspector of Schools, accordingly, issued a notice on 30.7.2010 calling upon the appellant as well as the Management of the institution to disclose the status of the post. The District Inspector of Schools by order dated 7.8.2010, after hearing the appellant, came to the conclusion that the continuance of the appellant was unwarranted after the post was converted into a substantive vacancy and he also noted the earlier order in favour of the appellant that limited the approval to the appointment of the appellant till the vacancy continued as a short term vacancy and does not get converted into a substantive vacancy.

6. The aforesaid order of the District Inspector of Schools dated 7.8.2010 was made subject matter of challenge in the writ petition giving rise to the present appeal. The learned single Judge relying on the Full Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Pramila Mishra v. District Inspector of Schools, and others, (1997) 2 UPLBEC 1329 and the judgment in Jai Prakash Singh’s case, reported in 2009(9) ADJ 650, dismissed the writ petition holding that once the vacancy was converted into a substantive vacancy, the appellant had no right to continue on the post in question.

7. Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Advocate for the appellant, submits that the view taken by the learned single Judge is not correct, inasmuch as, the decision in the case of Smt. Pramila Mishra (supra) by the Full Bench of this Court was rendered in the year 1997 where after certain provisions of the U.P. Secondary Education Services Selection Board Act, 1982 were amended and the provisions relating to the regularisation of ad hoc appointees against short term vacancies was introduced. On the strength of the aforesaid submissions and relying on the Division Bench judgment in the case of District Inspector of Schools and others v. Diwakar Lal and others, (2000) 3 UPLBEC 2494, Sri Khare submits that the appellant has a right to continue on the post in question or else the very provision relating to regularisation of such appointees would be rendered nugatory. He submits that the intention of the legislature in introducing the regularisation Rules clearly contemplate the continuance of an ad hoc appointee against a short term vacancy even a