By the Court.—Petitioner has filed the present writ petition, challenging the order dated 4.6.2007 passed by the Director of Higher Education, U.P., rejecting the claim of the petitioner for payment of salary from State fund. Consequential order of the committee of management dated 18.6.2007 has also been challenged. The petitioner has further prayed for a direction commanding the respondents to pay salary/remuneration to the petitioner from 6.8.2003 and continued to pay the same in terms of the Government Order dated 7.4.1998 from the State Government and also for a direction upon the respondents not to interfere in functioning of the petitioner as Lecturer (Economics) in J.S.H. (P.G.) college, Amroha District Jyotibaphule Nagar.

2. The State of U.P. has issued a Government Order on 7.4.1998, whereby, non aided colleges run by the private management were permitted to engage teachers on payment of fixed honorarium, so long as regularly selected teachers by the Higher Education Service Commission are not made available. Clause 3 and 4 of the said Government Order, which is relevant for the present purposes are reproduced below :

^^3- izR;sd v/;kid ekuns; ij v/;kiu djus esa igys izcU/krU= ,oa funs'kd] mPp f'k{kk dksbZ bl vk'k; dk lk/ku miyC/k djk;sxk fd tc ekuns; ds vk/kkj ij dk;Z djus ds ,ot esa fu;fer fu;qfDr iznku djus dh ekWx ugh djsxkA 'kiFk i= izkIr u gksus rd ekuns; dk Hkqxrku ugha fd;k tk;sxkA izcU/k rU= }kjk nh tkus okyh fu;qfDr funs'kd] mPp f'k{kk }kjk fu/kkZfjr izk:i esa nh tk;sxhA

4- dsoy 'kklu }kjk Lohd`r ,oa osru lank; ij vk pqds inksa ds fo:) tks v/;kid ^ek= ekuns; i{k j[ks tk;saxs mudh ekuns; dh /kujkf'k dk Hkqxrku osru lank; ls fd;k tk;sxkA^^

3. Pursuant to the aforesaid Government Order, an advertisement appears to have been issued by the college which is said to have been published in daily Hindi news paper Amar Ujala dated 19.6.2003, copy of which is enclosed as Annexure- 2 to the writ petition. It is undisputed that the petitioner applied pursuant to this advertisement. A supplementary-affidavit has been filed by the petitioner enclosing therewith a communication dated 23.8.2003, stated to have been sent by the Principal of the College to the Director of Higher Education, enclosing therewith the details of selection held in accordance with the Government Order dated 7.4.1998. A perusal of the enclosure, attached to this letter, shows that 3 persons were considered for the post and according to the recommendation of the selection committee, petitioner was placed at Sl. No. 3. One Km. Sharika Chaudhary was placed at Sl. No. 1 and Dr. Seema Malik was placed at Sl. No. 2.

4. It is not in dispute that neither any approval to the recommendation of the selection committee was accorded by the Director nor any appointment order in the format prescribed under the Government order dated 7.4.1998, was issued in favour of petitioner.

5. The issue as to whether persons on honorarium basis could be allowed to occupy the post of Lecturer etc. seems have been a matter of issue in writ petitions filed before this Court and also before the Apex Court. However, as this aspect of the matter is not relevant for the present purposes, and as such it is not necessary to dilate any further on it.

6. The petitioner claims that pursuant to the selection under taken for appointment on honorarium basis, he was allowed to continue as lecturer on honorarium basis. The petitioner filed writ petition No. 23870 of 2004. Initially, an interim order was passed by this Court allowing the petitioner to work till regularly selected candidate is available and ultimately the writ petition was disposed of in terms of the order dated 2.9.2004 passed in Writ Petition No. 22203 of 2004. By the said order, the Division Bench of this Court directed that so long as the issue relating to engagement of teachers on honorarium basis is pending before the Apex Court and regularly selected teachers are not available, the appointment made by interim ord