Appointments of primary school teachers must be made in accordance with the prescribed rules and procedures, and any appointments made in violation of such rules cannot be considered regular.

R. B. MHTROTRA, J.

In the above mentioned writ petitions common points arise for determination. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties the three writ petitions have been heard together. Writ Petition No. 24309 of 1993 has with the consent of the parties counsel has been heard as leading case.

2. The learned counsel for the parties have agreed on the point that on the basis of the decision is writ petition No. 24309 of 1993 the above mentioned two writ petitions can be decided.

3. In support of the writ petition Sri Raj Kumar Jain learned counsel for the petitioner, and in opposition thereof Sri Rameshwar Nath the learned counsel for respondent and learned Standing Counsel were heard.

4. The facts necessary for decision of writ petition are as under. There is a primary school of Mahadevi Karijan Vidyalaya, Langarpur, post Bankat, district Azamgarh which will for the sake of convenience be referred to as "vidyalaya" and the same is being administered from July 1973 by Registrar Societies Mahadevi Harijan Development Committee Langarpur, post Bankat, district Azamgarh. The said institution is registered under the Societies Registration Act and has been renewed from time to time. Basic Shiksha Adhikari accorded recognition to the Vidyalaya on permanent basis in 1989.

5. Regarding dismissal of some previously appointed teachers in illegal manner writ petition No. 35788/91-Dudhnath v. District Judge, Azamgarh is pending before this Court.

6. In regard to the decision of the present, writ petition it is essential at the outset to mention the facts of aforesaid writ petition No. 35786/91, Dudhnath Rampher, Ashok Kumar, Mahendra Rai, Ramdhari Ram afore said filed the said writ in this court. In this writ Mahadevi Harijan Manag ing Committee and Rambali ware also impleaded as respondents. It is cleat from the facts of aforesaid writ petition that the petitioners of the said writ petition Dudhnath and others instituted original suit No. 428/83 in the court of Munsif Moharamadabad Gohna for permanent injunction and in the said suit prayed for interim injunction that the defendants be restrained from interfering in any manner with the working of the plaintiffs as teacher and peon with Mahadevi Harijan boy school district Azamgarh. The plaintiffs No. 1 to 4 alleged themselves to be teachers of the aforesaid school and plaintiff No. 5 alleged himself to be peon of the said institution.

7. In the present writ petition ;there is no dispute about Ramdhari Singh, however, the plaintiffs No, 1 to 4 are involved in the present writ.

8. In suit No. 424/83 instituted by plaintiffs Dudhnath etc. the Munsifs court passed interim mandatory injunction order in favour of the plaintiffs. Aggrieved by the said order the management of the Vidya- laya filed civil appeal No. 48 of 1990 in the court of District Judge, Azamgarh. The district Judge Azamgarh heard together civil appeal No. "48/90 and civil appeal No, 147/90 and both the appeals were allowed by order dated 30-8-91 and the interim order passed by Munsif court was set aside. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order of the District Judge Dudhnath aforesaid filed in this court writ No. 35787/91 and this court by its order dated 12-12-91 stayed the operation of the order of District Judge dated 30-8-91,

The order dated 12-12-91 is still operative. According to that order the interim order passed in favour of Dudhnath etc. is also operative and on the strength of aforesaid two orders, Dudhnath and others are entitled to work as teachers in lie Vidyalaya.

9. In the present writ petition the case of petitioner No. 1 that plaintiff No. 1 was appointed as Assistant Teacher on 1-1-84 and on 1-11-86 he was promoted to the post of headmaster. It has also alleged in the petition that the appointment of the petitioner has been countersigned by sub-Inspector and Basic Shiksha Adhikari.

10. The case of petitioner No. 2 is that he is working in the Vidya laya from the year 1983 and the appointment letter g

Click Here to Read the rest of this document