The importance of being alert and not sleeping on one's rights in the legal system.

Heard above learned counsels for the parties. Perused record of the case.

2. At the outset, we may note that Special Appeal No. 497/2003 - Sabha Shanker Ojha v. State of U. P. & others, was filed and, on our Bench having nominated by Honble the Chief Justice vide order dated 3-7-

2003, said Special Appeal came up before us for consideration and consequently we passed following order dated 14-8-2003, which is reproduced:

"this Special Appeal arises from interim order passed in Writ Petition No. 25749/2003 dated 16-6-2003 by a learned Single Judge refusing to grant stay and directing Respondents to allow candidate selected by UPSESSB to join, in view of the order dated 07th July, 2003 and order dated 15th July, 2003, nothing that the learned counsels for the parties had agreed that instead of the Special Appeal, Writ Petition itself be heard and decided finally on merits.

In view of it, Writ Petition No. 25749 of 2003 itself heard and decided finally vide judgment and order dated 14-8-2003.

This special appeal is rendered infructuous and, accordingly, rejected".

3. Adarsh Intermediate College, Hata Bazar, Post Shivpur, District Gorakhpur, called the College, imparting education upto Intermediate standard, is a recognized Institution on grant-in-aid list of the State Government as contemplated under U. P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921, as amended up to date. Appointments of teaching staff in the College are subject to and governed by the provisions of U. P. Secondary Education Service Selection Board Act, as amended up to date, as well as the Rules and the Regulations framed thereunder.

4. On the statement made on behalf of all the concerned parties through their respective Counsels and consequent joint request at the Bar, we called for the record of Writ Petition No. 23311 of 1990 - Jagdish Prasad Shukla v. D. I. O. S. & others; Writ Petition No. 31846 of 2002, J. P. Shukla v. State of U. P. & others and Writ Petition No. 54139 of 2002, Jagdish Prasad Shukla v. UPSESSB & others, to hear and decide them all finally (since these cases rest on common facts and conflicting claims, between same parties with respect to their divergent claims to hold the post of Principal of the College ).

5. Undisputed facts, as admitted to the learned counsels for the parties, are reproduced hereinafter.

6. Erstwhile Principal of the Institution Bhaskar Prasad Diwedi, on attaining age of superannuation, retired on June 30, 1990. Consequently, the post of Principal in the college fell vacant w. e. f. July 1, 1990. The Management of the College proceeded to make ad hoc (temporary/ officiating) appointed and gave charge of the post of Principal of the College to one R. P. Pandey, said to be the then senior most lecturer of the College.

7. J. P. Shukla - another lecturer in the college, disputed seniority of above R. P. Pandey and claimed to be the senior most lecturer - felt aggrieved by the aforesaid ad hoc appointed of Principal of the college.

8. This lead to the filing of Writ Petition No. 23311 of 1990, J. P. Shukla v. D. I. O. S. , Gorakhpur & others, wherein said J. P. Shukla challenged validity of the managements order appointing R. P. Pandey as ad hoc Principal as well as for payment of salary in the Principals scale w. e. f. July 1, 1990. Record of said pending writ petition was summoned with prior notice to Sri V. B. Khare, Advocate, representing J. P. Shukla (petitioner in said Writ Petition), who made statement before this Court that said petition has been rendered infructuous by passage of time as J. P. Shukla has meanwhile on 30-6-2003 attained age of superannuation. Shri Khare, Advocate made a statement requesting this Court to dismiss the said writ petition. In view of the above, request of Shri Khare, Advocate, also that now it is a mere formality and also to save time of the Court, registry and the Advocates Writ Petition has been dismissed today by separate order on the record of said case. No other counsel has any obj