The main legal point established in the judgment is that the power to make ad hoc appointments of teachers in recognized institutions lies with the authority or body conferred with such power, and the Committee of Management could not make appointments unless statutorily authorized to do so.

( 1 ) THE controversy involved in this Bunch of writ petitions being one and the same, is being answered by one common order.

( 2 ) THE petitioners who are the teachers (Assistant Teachers or. Lecturers) appointed directly in different Intermediate Colleges allegedly on short-term vacancies on ad hoc basis have been refused approval of their appointment by the District Inspector of Schools either expressly or impliedly and thus were not being paid salary, which compelled them to file the present writ petitions.

( 3 ) IT is not necessary to give details of the qualifications of the petitioners or their eligibility for holding the post of teachers (Assistant Teachers or Lecturers) nor the seniority or the date of their appointment as all the petitioners were appointed on the post of Lecturers by the Committee of Management of their colleges during the period when the Committee of Management of all the institutions was allegedly bereft of its power to make ad hoc appointments or even appointment on short-term vacancies on the post of Lecturers.

( 4 ) THE Petitioners have raised various please in respect of their claim for payment of salary in the given pay-scale of Lecturers which broadly are as under :

(a) In all the cases appointments have been made by their respective Committee of Management on the post of Lecturer on ad hoc basis by direct recruitment.

(b) The appointments so made are protected being made on short-term vacancies, under the provisions of Regulation 9, Chapter II of the U. P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 and that section 16-E (11) of the Act also protects appointments made during the mid-academic session which appointments may be continued, till a regularly selected candidate is made available by the Selection Board.

(c) Requisition was sent to the Commission through District Inspector of Schools for making regular appointment but the Commission having failed to make appointments within the time prescribed gave liberty to the Committee of Management to make ad hoc appointments.

(d) In some cases requisition has been sent to the District Inspector of Schools but the appointments having not been made compelled the Committee of Management to make the appointments.

(e) In the absence of teachers being appointed by the Commission or by the Regional Selection committee or by the District Inspector of Schools, as the case may be, neither the regularly selected candidates were made available nor the ad hoc teachers could be appointed by the authority concerned with the result, it adversely effected the studies of the students who were to be imparted instructions in respective subjects for appearing in the examination, and therefore, in the interest of the students, such appointments were made by the respective Committee of management.

( 5 ) THE vacancies occurred during the mid-academic- session either because of the promotion of the regular incumbent as officiating Principal or because of the retirement of the regular incumbent or otherwise, but were not filled in through the Agency of the Commission or through the Regional Selection Committee, therefore, the said vacancies are said to be short-term vacancies which were filled in by the Committee of Management to keep the college functioning and to protect the interest of the students.

( 6 ) THE prayer for declaration of Section 33-E of U. P. Secondary Education Service Commission and Selection Board Act, 1982 (UP. Act No. 5 1982), (hereinafter referred to as the Selection board Act), as invalid, has also been made.

( 7 ) BEFORE proceeding further it would be appropriate to mention that though in the writ petition a plea has been raised challenging the vires of the aforesaid provision but no arguments on the invalidity of the same were advanced by the Counsel for the petitioners. It is, therefore, nor necessary for the Court to dwell upon the sustainability or invalidity of the aforesaid provision. That being so. The writ petitions are being conside