By the Court.—The appellants are Assistant Teachers in a Primary School. Aggrieved by an order of the State Government dated 10 January 2012, whereby their claim for payment of salary from the State fund has been rejected on the ground that the institution in which they teach does not fulfill the eligibility criteria for grant in-aid by the State, they alongwith other teachers filed a writ petition, (Writ-A No. 39886 of 2004, Om Prakash and others v. State of U.P. and others), which has been dismissed by the learned Single Judge by a judgment and order dated 29 August 2014 affirming the order of the State Government. Hence, the appellants are in appeal against the order of the learned Single Judge.

2. Kisan Adarsh Inter College, Thakur Nagar, District Gorakhpur (the Institution) is an institution recognised by the Board of High School and Intermediate Education, Uttar Pradesh. It receives aid out of state funds. A primary section is also attached to the institution. The parties are not in conflict on the basic facts that the primary section was recognised in the year 1972 and it was attached with the institution by an order of the District Inspector of Schools dated 28 March 1973, but the primary section was not receiving any aid from the State Government. The liability for payment of salaries of the teachers and other employees was on the Management of the institution.

3. In the year 1989, the State Government took a policy decision to pay salaries to teachers working in primary sections attached to High Schools and Intermediate Colleges out of the state fund subject to certain norms mentioned in the said policy. In furtherance thereof, 393 institutions were found entitled to get the benefit of the said Government order but the appellants’ institution was not included in the list of 393 institutions without disclosing any reason. The appellants and the Management made several representations to the State Government which failed to elicit any response from the State. Having no other option, the Committee of Management of the institution instituted a writ petition (Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 39266 of 1997, Committee of Management and another v. The State of U.P. and others, which was disposed of by a learned Single Judge of this Court by an order dated 21 November 1997 with a direction to the State Government to consider and decide the representation.

4. In compliance of the order of this Court, the State Government has passed an order dated 10 January 2002 rejecting the representation of the Committee of Management for taking the institution on the grant-in-aid list primarily on the ground that the institution does not fulfill certain conditions of the guidelines.

5. The grievance of the writ petitioners is that they are working for more than fifteen years with the approval of the Basic Education Officer but their claim for salaries from the State fund has been rejected on wholly untenable grounds. It is averred by them in the writ petition that they were appointed when one Paras Nath Mishra was Manager of the institution. In compliance of the order of this Court when a hearing had taken place before the State Government, the then Manager had submitted several documents to establish that the institution is a recognised institution and the primary section was validly attached with the institution and the appellants were duly appointed. The State Government has completely ignored those material documents and facts. The State Government had rejected the representation primarily on the ground that the institution was not in the ‘Pariseeman’ list and it was not receiving any ‘Kshatipurti’ grant. It has also been recorded in the order that only two teachers are trained teachers.

6. The writ petition filed by the appellants for challenging the order of the State Government dated 10 January 2002 was contested by the State by filing a counter-affidavit, wherein the grounds mentioned in the impugned order were reiterated. It