2004 (5) AWC 4099
(ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT)
Sunil Ambwani, J.
C.M.W.P. No. 13974 of 2004
Decided on April 6, 2004
Dhanesh Kumar Sharma
Versus
State of U. P. and others
Principal Appointment Dispute - U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921, U.P. Secondary Education Services Selection Board Act, 1982 - Regulation 2 of Chapter-II, Section 16, Section 18 - The court discussed the appointment of a seniormost teacher as an officiating Principal, the provisions for temporary vacancy, and the role of the Management and the Selection Board in teacher appointments. It highlighted the principles for promotion and supersession of seniormost teachers and emphasized that the right of a seniormost teacher to assume charge as officiating Principal cannot be defeated solely on the ground of past illness.
Fact of the Case:
The dispute arose when the 4th seniormost teacher sought to officiate as Principal after the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd seniormost teachers declined or resigned from the position due to various reasons. The District Inspector of Schools disapproved the 4th seniormost teacher's appointment and accepted the representation of the 5th seniormost teacher to resume charge as officiating Principal.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the 4th seniormost teacher's right to assume charge as officiating Principal cannot be defeated solely on the ground that he had expressed inability to continue in the past due to illness. It upheld the order of the District Inspector of Schools, dismissing the writ petition.
Issues: The issues revolved around the eligibility of the 4th seniormost teacher to assume charge as officiating Principal and the interpretation of relevant regulations and acts governing teacher appointments.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the interpretation of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921, and the U.P. Secondary Education Services Selection Board Act, 1982, emphasizing that the right of a seniormost teacher to assume charge as officiating Principal cannot be defeated solely on the ground of past illness.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed, and the order of the District Inspector of Schools, Bulandshahr, was upheld.
Sunil Ambwani, J.—Heard counsel for petitioner and learned standing counsel for respondents.
2. The respondent No. 5 is seniormost teacher in lecturer’s 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 seniormost 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 seniormost 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 seniormost 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 seniormost 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, Bulandshahr, 1995 AWC 122. This judgment upheld the contention that once seniormost 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 of 1993, Smt. Sudesh Kakkar v. Regional Inspectress of Girls School, 1st Region, Meerut and others. I have gone through the paragraphs 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 the seniormost 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 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 bona fide 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 Singh’s case (supra) does not give any reason or state any Principle of law to arrive at a conclusion that once seniormost 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 16F or as the case may be under sub-section (1) of Section 16FF. Sub-Regulation (3) provides that temporary vacancy on the post of head of institution for
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.