This is an intra court appeal against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 17.2.2012 passed in Writ Petition No. 34941 of 1991 whereby the writ petition was dismissed.

On oral prayer made on behalf of the learned counsel for the appellant, he is permitted to implead the Joint Director of Education, Aligarh as respondent no. 7 and the State of U.P. through Secretary, Secondary Education, Lucknow as respondent no. 8 in the array of parties during the course of the day.

The appellant was appointed as Lecturer in Arts in Shri Tika Ram Girls Inter College, Aligarh and is continuously teaching since 1.1.1990. The papers were forwarded to the District Inspector of Schools, but no orders were passed either approving or disapproving the selection and appointment of the appellant, nor any direction was issued for release of her salary. The appellant preferred Writ Petition No. 34941 of 1991. The writ court vide order dated 16.6.1992 granted six weeks' time to the learned Standing Counsel to file counter affidavit and further provided that the respondent shall pay the salary regularly to the petitioner till further orders of this Court. The appellant has been working continuously with effect from 1.1.1990 and has been regularly getting her salary with the approval of the District Inspector of Schools. The writ petition has been dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide order dated 17.2.2012, hence the present appeal.

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant has been working in the institution as Lecturer in Arts and also receiving salary for the last more than 20 years. He has further submitted that the appellant is entitled to the benefit of regularization as provided under Section 33-F of the U.P. Secondary Education (Service Selection Board) Act, 1982 (hereinafter called as 1982 Act').

In our opinion, the claim of regularization under Section 33-F of the 1992 Act is to be considered by the Selection Committee duly constituted under the provisions of the said Act and, therefore, it would be appropriate that the claim of the appellant for regularization at the first instance be considered by the aforesaid Selection Committee, which is chaired by the Joint Director, Secondary Education of the region.

We, accordingly, dispose of this appeal by providing that the appellant may file a representation within six weeks before the respondent no. 7 whereupon the respondent no. 7 shall examine the same strictly in accordance with law and pass a reasoned order, if possible, within three months from the date of receipt of such representation. The decision taken on the representation may be communicated to the appellant. We make it clear that in case, the appellant is found not entitled to be regularized, then the salary received by her, would not be recovered. Till such time the representation is decided, the parties shall maintain status-quo.

The appeal stands disposed of as above.