1986 Supreme(All) 316
High Court of Allahabad
U.C. Srivastava, S.C. Mathur, JJ.
Awadhesh Kumar Verma – Appellant
Versus
District Inspector of Schools, Barabanki – Respondent
Writ Petition No. 3432 of 1986
Decided On : Oct 17, 1986
Sharad Srivastava, A. Mannan, Umesh Srivastava
The conditions for regularization of ad hoc appointments under section 33-A of the U.P. Secondary Education Services Commission and Selection Boards Act, 1982, and the validity of the DIOS's nomination of a reserved pool teacher.
Headnote:
EDUCATION - U.P. SECONDARY EDUCATION SERVICES COMMISSION AND SELECTION BOARDS ACT, 1982 - SECTION 33-A - REGULARISATION OF APPOINTMENTS - CONDITIONS - SUBSTANTIVE VACANCY - AD HOC APPOINTMENT - PROCEDURE - RESERVED POOL TEACHER - NOMINATION BY DIOS - VALIDITY.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a teacher, was appointed on an ad hoc basis to a substantive vacancy in a college. The DIOS later directed the college to appoint a reserved pool teacher to the post, resulting in the petitioner's ouster. The petitioner claimed regularization under section 33-A of the U.P. Secondary Education Services Commission and Selection Boards Act, 1982.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the petitioner did not meet the conditions for regularization under section 33-A. The post was not substantively vacant when the petitioner was appointed, and the ad hoc appointment was not made in accordance with the prescribed procedure. The court also held that the DIOS's nomination of the reserved pool teacher was valid.
Issues: 1. Whether the petitioner met the conditions for regularization under section 33-A of the U.P. Secondary Education Services Commission and Selection Boards Act, 1982? 2. Whether the DIOS's nomination of the reserved pool teacher was valid?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. Section 33-A requires that the post be substantively vacant, the ad hoc appointment be made in accordance with the prescribed procedure, and the appointment be made before the commencement of the Ordinance. 2. The post was not substantively vacant when the petitioner was appointed because the previous incumbent was on leave and had not resigned or been terminated. The ad hoc appointment was not made in accordance with the prescribed procedure because the college did not advertise the vacancy or invite applications from the local Employment Exchange. 3. The DIOS's nomination of the reserved pool teacher was valid because it is obligatory on the part of the DIOS to nominate a reserved pool teacher for appointment against a substantive vacancy and the management of the institution is also under an obligation to offer appointment to such nominee of the DIOS.
Final Decision: The petition was dismissed.
S.C. Mathur, J.
1. THE dispute in this petition pertains to the post of Lecturer in physics in Fatehchand Jagdish Rai Inter College, Safdarganj, district Barabanki, for short college. THE District Inspector of Schools has directed the Management of the College to appoint Sri Ayodhya Prasad Pandey, opposite party no. 3, to the said post through his letter dated 23-4-1986, Annexure no. 3. THE post was held by the petitioner and implementation of the order of the District Inspector of Schools would have resulted in petitioner's ouster from service and hence the petitioner approached this Court. THE petitioner's case is that his appointment to the post stands regularised under section 33-A of the U. P. Secondary Education Services Commission and Selection Boards Act, 1982, for short Commission Act, and therefore he cannot be ousted from the said post. A few facts necessary for the disposal of the petition may be noticed.
2. SRI Manipal Singh was permanent Lecturer in Physics in the concerned College. He was appointed Principal in Vidyut Parishad Higher Secondary School, Panki, district Kanpur. He joined the said post on 5-8-1980. In order to enable him to join the post of Principal, the College granted him leave without pay. In the resultant vacancy in the post of Lecturer in Physics in the College, SRI Ghanshyam Misra was appointed on ad hoc basis. SRI Ghanshyam Misra also left the post and thereafter the petitioner was appointed to the said post with effect from 9-12-1981. It may be stated that Ghanshyam Misra's appointment was in leave vacancy and he did not hold the post in substantive capacity. By order dated 9-12-1981, Annexure no. 1 the District Inspector of Schools, for short DIOS, approved petitioner's appointment to the post from the date of taking over charge till 20-5-1982 in the vacancy caused by the grant of leave without pay to SRI Mahipal Singh from 4-5-1980 to 20-6-1982. The petitioner continued to hold the said post on the basis of extensions granted from time to time. It appears that the DIOS, by his order dated 30-10-1984 granted approval to the continuance of the petitioner on the post of Lecturer upto 19-5-1985 and his services were to stand terminated with effect from 20-5-1985. On 29-4-1985 the petitioner made some representation to the DIOS through the Management regarding his continuance on the post even after 19-5-1985. The DIOS by his order dated 20-9-1985, Annexure 2, provided that the petitioner will continue to hold the post till a candidate selected by the U. P. Secondary Education Commission, Allahabad, joins on the post. On the joining of such candidate on the post the services of the petitioner were automatically to stand terminated. Although the College communicated the vacancy to the Commission, no selection was made for the post. On 12-6-1985 the Uttar Pradesh Secondary Education Services Commission and Selection Boards (Amendment) Ordinance No. 12 of 1985 was enforced whereby section 33-A was added to the parent Act. Under this provision a teacher directly appointed before the Commencement of the Ordinance on ad hoc basis against a substantive vacancy in accordance with paragraph 2 of the U. P. Secondary Education Services Commission 'Removal of Difficulties) Order, 1981 as amended from time to time who possessed the qualification prescribed under or was exempted from such qualification in accordance with the provisions of the Intermediate Education Act, 1921 was to be deemed to have been appointed in substantive capacity with effect from the date of commencement of the Ordinance, provided such teacher had been continuously serving from the date of appointment up to the date of such commencement. The petitioner's plea is that he is entitled to the benefit of section 33-A and, therefore, he would be deemed to have been appointed in substantive capacity with effect from 12-6-1985. The petitioner has stated that Mahipal Singh became a confirmed Principal in Vidyut Parishad High School wit