IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
AJIT KUMAR, J.
Committee of Management, Vaidik Kanya Inter College and Another – Petitioners
Versus
State of U.P. and Others – Respondents
Civil Misc. Writ Petition Nos. 7096 of 2020, 3608, 9586 of 2021, 866 of 2020
Decided On : 05-04-2023
Seniority - Educational Institutions - U.P. Secondary Education Services Selection Board Act - Sections 17, 3 - The court interpreted the provisions regarding seniority and appointment in educational institutions, emphasizing that unadvertised vacancies cannot be filled by candidates from previous selections, influencing the decision on seniority disputes.
Fact of the Case:
The case involves a seniority dispute between two lecturers in an educational institution, with one lecturer claiming seniority based on earlier selection and joining, while the other contends that the first's joining was invalid due to an interim court order.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the first lecturer's joining was valid despite the interim order, as she was selected and directed to join by the education authorities, and thus should be considered senior to the other lecturer.
Issues: The main issues were whether the first lecturer could be denied seniority due to an interim order preventing her from working and whether the second lecturer was entitled to a hearing regarding the seniority determination.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the first lecturer's selection and joining were valid, and the interim order did not negate her seniority, emphasizing that the principles of natural justice were upheld despite the lack of a hearing for the second lecturer.
Result: The court dismissed the petitions challenging the seniority and ordered the first lecturer to be appointed as officiating Principal.
JUDGMENT :
AJIT KUMAR, J.
1. Heard Sri Bheem Singh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner Committee of Management Vaidik Kanya Inter College, Dadri, District Gautam Budh Nagar in Writ A No. 7096 of 2020 and on behalf of Smt. Anupama in Writ A No. 3608 of 2021 and Sri Jagannath Singh, learned counsel appearing for petitioner Smt.Ratan Prabha in Writ A No. 866 of 2020 and Writ A No. 9586 of 2021. In all the writ petitions controversy relates to seniority between one Smt. Ratan Prabha and Anupama in the institution so as to hold charge of officiating Principal. Smt. Anupama has been permitted by the Committee of Management to officiate as Principal of the institution. In Writ A No. 7096 of 2020 and in Writ A No. 3608 of 2021, the order passed by the Regional Joint Director of Education dated 25.10.2019 holding the petitioner senior most lecturer is under challenge. In Writ A No. 866 of 2020, the prayer is to the effect to direct the Committee of Management to give effect to the order passed by the Regional Joint Director of Education i.e. directing the petitioner to be the senior most teacher in the institution, whereas in Writ A No. 9586 of 2021, the officiating charge given to Smt. Anupama by order dated 24.8.2019 and attestation of signature of Smt. Anupama was given on 17.10.2019. The case has a checkered history, and, therefore, needs lucid detail of facts which are stated as under:
2. The petitioner Ratan Prabha applied for the post of lecturer (Civics) pursuant to advertisement being No. 1 of 2004 issued by U.P. Secondary Services Selection Board (hereinafter referred as 'Board'). In the selection held by the Board, petitioner Ratan Prabha got selected and was recommended initially for being appointed as a lecturer (Civics) in Nagar Palika Inter College, Badaun. However, in the absence of vacancy, there at Badaun she was not permitted to join and consequently filed writ petition before this Court being Writ A No. 19955 of 2006. The said writ petition was disposed of, vide order dated 10.4.2006, issuing a direction to the Board to make a recommendation for adjustment of petitioner in some other institution where vacancy exists. The order passed by this Court dated 10.4.2006 is quoted below:
Sri A.K. Yadav, the learned counsel for the Selection Board, upon instructions received by him, admits this fact.
In view of the aforesaid, the writ petition is allowed and a mandamus is issued to the Selection Board to pass fresh orders, recommending the name of the petitioner in another institution, where a vacancy exists, within one month from the date of the production of a certified copy of this order.”
3. In compliance of the orders so passed above by the Court, the Board made recommendation on 17.5.2006 adjusting the petitioner as a lecturer (Civics) in Vaidik Kanya Inter College, District Gautam Budh Nagar, the institution been run by the petitioner in writ petition No. 7096 of 2020. It appears that when the recommendation was not being put to action at the end of the institution, a clear directive was issued by the Director Secondary Education U.P. Lucknow on 20.7.2006 asking the District Inspector of Schools to ensure joining of the petitioner Ratan Prabha and in the event of failure on the part of the Committee of Management not issuing the appointment order, take action under Regulation 17 of 1998 Regulations. The letter issued by the Director of Secondary Education U.P. Lucknow dated 20.7.2006 for its better appraisal is reproduced herein-under:
4. It is upon the above order been passed by the Director of Secondary Education that petitioner was given joining directly in the institution by the Principal of the institution on 1.7.2006. This
A.K. Kraipak v. Union of India
Ashwin S. Mehta and another v. Union of India and others
Charan Lal Sahu v. Union of India
Odisha Foresh Development Corporation v. M/s. Anupam Traders
The court established that interim orders do not invalidate prior valid selections and that seniority must be determined based on actual service and selection dates.
Employment and Service matter - Re-assessment of seniority - As per Rule 3(1)(b), seniority of teachers in a grade has to be determined on basis of their substantive appointment in that grade, meanin....
Point of Law : Education Officer (Secondary) can exercise jurisdiction to determine any inter se dispute as regards seniority that has been referred to him under Rule 12(3) of the said Rules till suc....
The court upheld the Single Judge's decision, emphasizing the importance of seniority and misconduct in determining appointment validity under established legal principles.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of following the provisions of Rule 12 of the Maharashtra Employee of Private Schools (Conditions of Services) Regulation Rules, 198....
The main legal point established is that seniority is determined based on substantive appointment and age, as specified in the regulations of the Intermediate Education Act, 1921, overriding the time....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.