( 1 ) IN both the above appeals a common question of law is involved and, as such have been taken up and heard together.

( 2 ) THE writ petitioner-appellants (hereinafter referred to as the appellants)were appointed as Officiating Principal in the respective institutions on the basis of their seniority and were paid salary in the pay-scale of Principal. Their officiating appointment continued for long and in the meantime they attained the age of superannuation in the middle of the academic session and, as such by virtue of regulation 21 contained in Chapter III of the Regulations framed under the intermediate Education Act, 1921 they became entitle to function till the end of the academic session i. e. 30th June, 2010. However, by the order of the District inspector of Schools dated 16. 11. 2009 and that of the Manager of the Institution dated 13. 11. 2009 respectively they have been denied functioning as Officiating principal and it has been provided that they would continue only as a Teacher till 30th June.

( 3 ) THE aforesaid orders were assailed by the appellants by filing separate writ petitions with a further prayer to allow them to work as Officiating Principal and to continue to pay salary of the post of Principal. The writ petitions have been dismissed by the learned Single Judge on the ground that the Officiating Principal has no right to the post and appellants are only entitled to continue as Teachers till the end of academic session. In dismissing the writ petitions reliance has been placed upon earlier Division Bench decisions of the Court.

( 4 ) AGGRIEVED by the dismissal of their respective writ petitions by the learned single Judge these appeals under Rule 5 Chapter VIII of the High Court Rules, 1952 have been preferred.

( 5 ) WE have heard Sri Ashok Khare, Senior Advocate assisted by Sri J. P. Singh and Sri Yogesh Saxena for the appellants, learned Standing Counsel for the State of U. P. and Sri B. N. Pandey for respondents No. 5 and 6 in Special appeal No. 1991 of 2009.

( 6 ) LEARNED counsel for the appellants submitted that the appellants who have been appointed as Officiating Principals would continue to work as Officiating principals even in the extended period as under Regulation 21 the services of the appellants are deemed to have been automatically extended till the end of academic session. A distinction has also been sought to be made between "re-appointment after retirement" and "extension of service" and it is submitted that Regulation 21 provides for extension of service and riot re-appointment. It is also contended that the action of the respondents impugned in the writ petitions amounts to reversion of the appellants.

( 7 ) THE services of principal, headmaster, teacher and other employees of the intermediate colleges in the State of U. P. are governed by the U. P. Intermediate education Act, 1921 (hereinafter referred to as the act ). Section 16-G of the Act provides that every person employed in a recognised institution shall be governed by such conditions of service as may be prescribed by Regulations. In exercise of powers under Section 15 of the Act the Board has framed Regulations. The said Regulations in Chapter III contains Regulation 21 which provides for 60 years as the age of superannuation of its teaching and non-teaching staff and further that if the age of superannuation of the teaching staff falls in between the academic session then they shall continue to serve the institution till 30th June i. e. the end of the session. This Regulation permitting continuation of service of the teaching staff beyond the date of superannuation is only for the benefit of the students so that the serving teacher continues to teach students till the completion of the ongoing academic session. The aforesaid Regulation 21 of the Regulations is quoted below:

"21. Superannuation age of Principal, Headmaster, Teacher and other employees would be 60 years. If above said superannuation age of any Principal, h

Click Here to Read the rest of this document