SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(All) 418

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
SANJAY YADAV, CJ., PRAKASH PADIA, J.
State of U.P. And 2 Others - Appellants
Versus
Jai Prakash Uttam And Another - Respondents
Special Appeal Defective No. 41 of 2021
Decided On : 16-06-2021

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Subhash Rathi.
For the Respondent: Siddharth Khare.

Point of Law: Post of Clerk – Selection process - Appointment of petitioner/respondent, if allowed, will amount allowing a person to be appointed without following procedure of law as selection process of petitioner/respondent has already been quashed by this Hon’ble Court. This is not permissible in exercise of power conferred under Article 226 of Constitution of India.

Headnote:

U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 - U.P. High Schools And Intermediate Colleges (Payment Of Salaries Of Teachers And Other Employees) Act, 1971 - Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 226 - Regional Level Committee - Post of clerk - In Institution in question, there is only one sanctioned post of clerk which was held by one Raj Kumar Uttam. He retired from service after attaining age of superannuation - In Institution in question, there is huge strength of students and in order to discharge the proper work as well for disposal of official work, certain computers were purchased by Colleges Authorities. In order to fill up post of clerk, a decision was taken by Management to fill up the aforesaid post by way of direct recruitment by a person having full knowledge of operation of computer. Permission was granted by D.I.O.S. vide its order - Pursuant to advertisement petitioner-respondent as well as various other candidates applied for post. The petitioner-respondent was found most suitable candidates by Selection Committee. Subsequently papers of petitioner-respondent were transmitted before D.I.O.S. for obtaining prior approval which is mandatory requirement as per Regulation 101 contained in Chapter III of Act, 1921.

Finding of the court: Once advertisement and all consequential actions were quashed by this Court, there was no lawful process of selection of petitioner/respondent. The entire appointment process of petitioner/respondent was set aside by this Court, thus in absence of lawful selection process, the order impugned in special appeal is not tenable in law and is liable to be set aside - It is clear that the single post of Class III employee in Intermediate College has to filled up by promotion - Regional Level Committee while passing the order has not taken into consideration the fact that entire selection process of petitioner/respondent has already been set aside by this Court and has proceeded to examine claim of petitioner as petitioner/respondent was appointed after following procedure prescribed under Act & Regulations framed there under. The reason given in order which was impugned in writ petition, although are not tenable in law, but since selection process for post of clerk was quashed by this Court by order, order impugned in the present appeal is not tenable and is hereby set aside.

Result: Special appeal is allowed.

JUDGMENT :

Prakash Padia, J.

1. The matter is taken up through video conferencing.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

3. The present Special Appeal has been filed by the appellant State challenging the judgement and order dated 03.03.2020 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ A No.1228 of 2015.

4. It appears from perusal of the record that at Prem Puri Badagaon District Kanpur Nagar, there is an educational institution namely Jan Shikshan Inter College (In short “Institution”). The said Institution is governed by the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 and U.P. High Schools And Intermediate Colleges (Payment Of Salaries Of Teachers And Other Employees) Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as “Act, 1921 and Act, 1971” respectively). The Institution in question received grant in aid upto High School level. In the Institution in question, there is only one sanctioned post of clerk which was held by one Raj Kumar Uttam. He retired from service after attaining the age of superannuation on 30.05.2006. In the Institution in question, there is huge strength of the students and in order to discharge the proper work as well for disposal disposal of official work, certain computers were purchased by the Colleges Authorities. In order to fill up the post of clerk, a decision was taken by the Management to fill up the aforesaid post by way of direct recruitment by a person having full knowledge of operation of computer. In this regard an application was submitted by the Inbefore the District Inspector of Schools (In short “D.I.O.S.) for grant of permission in order to fill up the aforesaid post by direct recruitment. The permission was granted by the D.I.O.S. vide its order dated 19.10.2007. Pursuant to the same, advertisement was published in two daily newspapers namely Swatantra Bharat and Times of India on 24.10.2007 and 27.10.2007 respectively. Pursuant to the aforesaid advertisement, the petitioner-respondent as well as various other candidates applied for the aforesaid post. The petitioner-respondent was found most suitable candidates by the Selection Committee. Subsequently, the papers of petitioner-respondent were transmitted before the D.I.O.S. for obtaining prior approval which is mandatory requirement as per Regulation 101 contained in Chapter III of the Act, 1921.

5. Before the aforesaid approval granted, one Narendra Singh, Class IV employee preferred Writ Petition No.57689 of 2007. In the aforesaid writ petition, interim order was granted by the learned Single Judge. Since the petitioner-respondent was not implemented in the aforesaid writ petition, he filed an application for his impleadment which was allowed. Apart from the petitioner-respondent, another class IV employee namely Virendra Kumar also filed impleadment which was also allowed. After hearing counsel for the parties, the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition filed by one Narendra Singh vide its judgment and order dated 21.09.2010. The learned Single Judge was pleased to cancel the advertisement dated 24.10.2007 and 27.10.2007 as well as consequential action as has been taken by the Committee of Management for Direct Appointment of Class III employee and the appointment of petitioner-respondent. Further directions were given to the Regional Level Committee headed by Regional Joint Director of Education to examine the claim of Narendra Singh as well as respondent no.6 (Virendara Kumar) and other candidates. The aforesaid order is reproduced below:-

    “Heard Sri Alok Dwivedi learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents no.1, 2 and 3, Sri Arun Kumar Tiwari for the respondent no. 4, Sri R.K. Ojha for the newly impleaded respondent no. 5 and Sri Agnihotri holding brief of Sri Neeraj Kumar Pandey for the newly impleaded respondent no. 6 Virendra Kumar.

This writ petition questions the selections on the solitary sanctioned post of clerk in Jan Shikshan Intermediate College Prempur, Badagaon, District Kanpur Nagar.

The petitio

            Click Here to Read the rest of this document
            1
            2
            3
            4
            5
            6
            7
            8
            9
            10
            11
            SupremeToday Portrait Ad
            supreme today icon
            logo-black

            An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

            Please visit our Training & Support
            Center or Contact Us for assistance

            qr

            Scan Me!

            India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

            For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

            whatsapp-icon Back to top