The right of the senior most teacher to assume the role of officiating Principal cannot be defeated solely on the ground of past illness, and there must be evidence of disqualification or unsuitability for such a decision to be made.

( 1 ) HEARD Counsel for petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for respondents.

( 2 ) THE Respondent No. 5 is senior most teacher in lecturers grade in the institution. On the retirement of permanent Principal, he took over charge as officiating Principal in July, 2002. In april, 2003, he gave in writing that on account of illness, he shall not be able to continue as officiating Principal and thus the second senior most person namely Sri Subhash Chandra Gupta was appointed as officiating Principal. Sri Subhash Chandra Gupta resigned on 25. 11. 2003 on the ground of some domestic circumstances after which the third senior most person Sri Adarsh kumar was offered to officiate as Principal. Sri Adarsh Kumar declined to accept the office of officiating Principal as he was going to retire on 30. 6. 2004. In these circumstances, the authorised Controller handed over charge of the officiating Principal to the 4th senior most teacher on 25. 11. 2003. It is at this stage the Respondent No. 5 again appeared before the District inspector of Schools and requested to officiate as Principal on the ground that he has recovered from illness. By impugned order, the District Inspector of Schools has disapproved the proposal of the authorised Controller to allow the petitioner, who is the 4th senior most teacher to officiate as Principal and has accepted the representation of the Respondent No. 5 to resume charge of officiating Principal.

( 3 ) COUNSEL for petitioner submits that once the officiating Principal has resigned, he cannot be thereafter permitted to assume charge as officiating Principal. The petitioner has relied upon judgment of this Court in Satya Beer Singh v. District Inspector of Schools, Buland Shaher, reported in 1995 AWC 122, this judgment upheld the contention that once senior most teacher declines the offer as officiating Principal, she cannot claim right subsequently to be appointed as officiating Principal in the institution. This judgment is based upon a decision in the Special appeal No. 141/1993 between Smt. Sudesh Kakkar v. Regional Inspectress of Girls School, 1st region, Meerut and Ors. . I have gone through the Paragraphs No. 11, 12 and 13 of the judgment. Neither the judgment of special appeal nor learned Single Judge has given any reason to hold that once he senior most teacher declines to hold or to continue with the office, she cannot be subsequently appointed as officiating Principal.

( 4 ) THE facts and circumstances of this case are different. The petitioner took over and had functioned as officiating Principal from July, 2002 to April, 2003 and thereafter expressed his inability to continue due to illness. After he recovered from illness and the office again fell vacant he requested to be appointed as officiating Principal.

( 5 ) THE letter dated 25. 4. 2003 sent by Respondent No. 5 was conditional. This letter cannot be treated to be a resignation, and inability to function as officiating Principal forever. It was written on the ground that he was not keeping good health. The petitioner had given adequate and bonafide reasons, to decline to function as officiating Principal. Once the stated disability was removed, he requested to be considered to officiate as Principal. The judgment in Satya Veer singhs case (supra) does not give any reason or state any principle of law to arrive at a conclusion that once senior most teacher declines, he cannot be subsequently appointed as officiating Principal.

( 6 ) REGULATION 2 of Chapter-II of the Regulations made under the U. P. Intermediate Education act, 1921 provides that the post of head of the institution, shall except as provided in Sub-clause (2) (where the institution is raised from High School to Intermediate Colleges) be filled by direct recruitment after reference to the Selection Committee constituted under Sub-section (1) of section 16-F or as the case may be under Sub-section (1) of Section 16-FF. Sub-Regulation (3)provides that tempora