Heard Sri R. C. Tewari, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel for opposite party Nos. 1, 2 and 3.

2. The case starts with an advertisement, which was issued on 4-10-1998 for filling up three posts of Assistant Teachers B. T. C. in Arya Kanya Pathshala, Hardoi, copy of the advertisement is annexure-1 to this writ peti tion. The case of the petitioner is that he along with Smt. Rachna Agnihotry, were selected against the two general category posts. It may be mentioned here that out of the three posts mentioned above, one post was reserved for SC/st and the remaining two posts for gen eral category candidate. On 10-7-1999, the Manager of the College sought approval from the District Inspector of Schools. The Dis trict Inspector of Schools vide his letter dated 12-7-1999 contained in annexure-4 to the writ petition, accorded his approval to the appoint ment of the petitioner and Smt. Rachna Agnihotry in

B. T. C. pay scale with the rider that if any irregularity would be found in the appointment, then the appointment would be cancelled. It is strange note by the District Inspector of Schools because he should have granted approval only after ascertaining himself that there was no irregularity for the ap pointment. In any view of the matter, his approval marked a finality to the selection pro cess and accordingly appointment letters were, issued on 12-7-1999, itself, which is annexure-5 to this writ petition. On 13-7-1999, the petitioner joined the post as Assistant Teacher in the college in question. For some reason on 7-8-1999, opposite party No. 2 the Joint Accounts Officer, Directorate of Education, U. P. , Allahabad, directed the District Inspec tor of Schools to stop payment of salary and asked for entire file of approval of the petitioner and Smt. Rachna Agnihotri. On 2-12-1999, the opposite party No. 2 himself di rected the District Inspector of Schools to make payment to the petitioner as well as Km. Rachna Agnihotri but the salary was not paid. When the salary was not paid even after mak ing the representation dated 21-12-1999, the writ petition was filed before this Court be ing W. P. No. 687 (SS) 2000 Km. Rachna Agnihotri v. Director of Education, U. P. , Allahabad, in which interim order was passed to pay salary to Km. Rachna Agnihotri. In compliance of this order, Km. Rachna Agnihotri was paid salary but the petitioner could not be paid because she had not pre ferred any writ petition at that time. The present writ petition was filed by the petitioner Smt. Sita Trivedi against non payment of sal ary. On 27- 3-2000, the following order was passed:-

"heard the learned counsel for the peti tioner and the learned standing counsel who has accepted notice on behalf of opposite par ties Nos. 1 to 3. Issue notice to opposite party No. 4. List this petition along with the record of writ petition No. 687 (SS) 2000 in the week commencing 01st May, 2000. "

"in the meantime, the opposite parties are directed to pay salary to the petitioner in ac cordance with the order dated 2-12-99, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure- No. 7 to the writ petition or show cause to this Court. "

3. It may be noted that the Court had di rected the opposite parties to pay salary or to show- cause.

4. On 20-4-2000 opposite party No. 3 passed an order, in which the present District Inspector of Schools reviewed its earlier or der of his predecessor dated 12-7-1999 and rejected the claim of the petitioner for pay ment of salary. This order rejection was chal lenged by way of amendment, which was moved on May 4, 2000. This Court vide its order dated 18-9-2001 passed the following order allowing the amendment application :-

"heard counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel. By this application the petitioner has prayed for adding para graphs 1 A, 14a to 14h and also grounds from D-l to D-5. Certain amendment has also been prayed for in the relief clause. The amend ment application is allowed. The petitioner

Click Here to Read the rest of this document