Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Gupta, J.—A discardent note was struck by a Division Bench while hearing the instant appeal, unable to agree with an earlier Division Bench in Vindhyachal Yadav v. State of U.P. and others, 2015(8) ADJ 688. Consequently, the following questions have been referred to the Full Bench :

“(i) Whether training qualification B.P.Ed. is equivalent qualification to that of B.Ed., L.T., B.T./C.T. Etc. so as to be covered by the phrase “equivalent qualification” of training degree/diploma as contained by Clause-2 of Appendix-A of Chapter-II of the Regulations framed under the Intermediate Education Act, 1921?

(ii) Whether a teacher possessed of a degree of Post Graduate and training qualification of B.P.Ed. from an institute duly recognized by National Council for Teachers Education is qualified for being considered for appointment as Principal/Headmaster of a recognized High School/Intermediate institution?

(iii) Whether the law laid down by the Division Bench in the case of Vindhyachal Yadav (Supra) is the correct law or not.”

2. The Division Bench in Vindhyachal Yadav holds that B.P.Ed. is not mentioned or included in Appendix-A to Regulation I of Chapter-II of the Regulations framed under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 as a postgraduate training qualification, consequently, a teacher possessing the same is not qualified to be appointed as Headmaster/Principal of a recognized institution. A same line of reasoning was taken by the learned Single Judge in judgement under appeal.

3. Before we delve on the issue, we would like to make a brief reference to the backdrop in which the controversy arose. The order under challenge by the original writ petitioner Harish Chandra dated 15.7.2013 was passed by District Inspector of Schools, Azamgarh attesting the signatures of Amal Kishore Singh, the appellant, as officiating Headmaster of Mishra Uchchattar Mahavidyalaya, Badagaon, Azamgarh. It is a recognised institution under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 (for short ‘the Act’) imparting education upto High School level. The institution is receiving grant-in-aid from the State Government and consequently, the provisions of the U.P. High School and Intermediate Colleges (Payment of Salaries of Teachers and Other Employees) Act, 1971 are applicable. The original writ petitioner was appointed as TGT grade teacher in Sanskrit on 4.8.2004 pursuant to a letter of District Inspector of Schools dated 20.7.2004. On the other hand, the appellant was recommended for appointment as assistant teacher by U.P. Secondary Education Services Selection Board. On 20.7.2004, the District Inspector of Schools issued appointment letter appointing him as teacher in physical education and in pursuance thereof, he joined on 5.8.2004. The Committee of Management treating the appellant as senior to the original writ petitioner forwarded his signature for attestation as Adhoc Headmaster, the post having fallen vacant on 30.6.2013. In pursuance thereof, the District Inspector of Schools passed the order impugned in the writ petition attesting signature of the appellant. One of the ground of attack was that the appellant being a teacher in physical education possessing B.P.Ed. degree was not qualified to be appointed as Headmaster. It was contended that the original writ petitioner, on the other hand, having training qualification of B.Ed. is the only qualified senior most teacher eligible to hold office of Headmaster. The learned Single Judge held that a candidate possessing C.P.Ed., B.P.Ed. or M.P.Ed. degree is ineligible to teach school subjects as per Second Schedule to the National Council for Teacher Education (Determination of Minimum Qualifications for Recruitment of Teachers in Schools) Regulations, 2001. It has been observed that under the said Regulations, teachers trained for teaching school subjects constitut