The main legal principle established in the judgment is that the eligibility for promotion has to be ascertained with a particular date in the same year of recruitment, and all vacancies have to be filled up in the same year of recruitment to prevent disruption in teaching.

( 1 ) HEARD Shri Manish Goel learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Sudhir Agarwal, learned additional Advocate General appearing for State of U. P.

( 2 ) BY this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing order dated 21. 5. 2005 passed by district Inspector of Schools Inter College, Kanpur Nagar that the petitioner is not eligible for promotion on the post of Lecturer (Commerce ). A writ in the nature of mandamus restraining the respondent No. 3 from placing the papers before the selection committee to be constituted as per rile 12 of U. P. Secondary Education Service Rules 1998 on the basis of the order dated 21. 5. 2005 has also been prayed. It has further been prayed that a mandamus be issued commanding the respondent No. 2 to submit the documents of the petitioner before the Selection committee for consideration of the petitioner for promotion on the post of lecturer in Commerce.

( 3 ) BRIEF fact giving rise to this writ petition are;

( 4 ) HAR Sahai Jagdamba Sahai Inter College is a recognized institution under the provisions of UP intermediate Education Act 1921. The institution is receiving grant in aid from the State of U. P and is also governed by the provision of U. P Secondary Education (Services Selection Board)Act, 1982. The petitioner was initially appointed as Assistant Teacher C. T grade and with effect from 20. 11. 1990 petitioner is being treated as Assistant Teacher L. T. grade. Shri Kripa Shanker tripathi who was working as Lecturer (Commerce) attained the age of superannuation causing a substantive vacancy on the post of Lecturer (Commerce) on 30. 6. 1995. A substantive vacancy on the post of Lecturer (Commerce) arose with effect from 1. 7. 1995. The committee of management passed resolution on 9. 2. 1998 resolving to forward the papers of the petitioner for promotion as Lecturer (Commerce) on the vacancy of Shri Kripa Shanker Tripathi. The post which fell vacant due to retirement of Kripa Shanker Tripathi was a post falling under 50% promotion quota. The Principal wrote the letter dated 19. 2. 2005 to the District Inspector of schools for early disposal of the promotion matter of the petitioner. The District Inspector of schools vide his letter dated 21. 5. 2005 wrote to the Principal/authorised Controller of the institution taking the view that petitioner is not eligible for promotion since he did not had five years of service in the L. T grade on the date of occurrence of vacancy. The service book of the petitioner was returned. This order of the district Inspector of Schools has been challenged in this writ petition.

( 5 ) SHRI Manish Goel, learned counsel for the petitioner made following submission in support of the writ petition:

(i) That the petitioner is fully eligible for promotion on the post of Lecturer (Commerce) on the first day of the year of recruitment which was 1. 7. 1998 for the post of Lecturer (Commerce)since the management for the first time considered the claim of promotion on 9. 2. 1998. (ii) The petitioner had completed 5 years of service in L. T grade on 20. 11. 1995, hence was fully eligible on the date when management considered the petitioner for promotion. According to 1998 rules the relevant date for possessing eligibility is first day of the year of recruitment.

( 6 ) THE learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on division Bench judgment of this court reported in 2001 (1) Education Service Cases 420 Kashi Prasad Sharma v. State of U. P; 1997 (10) SCC 226 Union of India v. Madras Telephones Scheduled Castes and Scheduled tribes Social Welfare Association and 2002 (1) SCC Parmeshwar Prasad v. Union of India and Ors.

( 7 ) SHRI Sudhir Agarwal, learned Additional Advocate General refuting the submission of the counsel for the petitioner contended that petitioner is not eligible for promotion on the post of lecture (Commerce) and no error has been committed by District Inspector of Schools in returning the papers of the petitioner. S