Appointments made under inapplicable statutory rules are void and cannot confer enforceable rights; the governing statutes change with institutional upgrades.

JUDGMENT :

MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J.

Order on Impleadment Application

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The impleadment application has been moved for impleading Manish Kumar and Durgesh Dhar as respondents No. 7 & 8 as they are the persons who participated in the selections, but have been declared unsuccessful and made a complaint regarding the selection proceeding. Therefore, as complainants, they cannot be permitted to be arrayed as party. They can also not be permitted on the ground that they have not challenged the appointment of the petitioners on any ground which was the option left to them.

3. Accordingly, the impleadment application is rejected.

Order on petition

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Shailendra Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

2. The present petition has been filed, with a prayer to quash the orders dated 2.12.2015 and 10.12.2015, passed by respondents No. 3 & 4, respectively, with a further prayer to direct the respondents not to interfere in the peaceful functioning of the petitioners as Assistant Teachers in the concerned institution and also make payment as and when it comes due.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the institution of respondent No.6, namely, Anglo Junior High School Persia, Gorakhpur is an institution, established up to Junior High School level and the said institution was recognized under U.P. Basic Education Act, 1972 (in short 'Act, 1972') and appointment of teachers are being made under the U.P. Recognized Basic Education (Junior High School) (Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Teachers) Rules, 1978 (in short 'Rules, 1978').

4. The aforesaid institution came into grant-in-aid list in 1980-81 up to Junior High School. Initially one post of Head Master and four posts of Assistant Teachers were sanctioned. However, by order of respondent No.3 dated 31.3.2019, one extra post of Assistant Teacher was sanctioned. Accordingly, five teachers, namely, Radhey Shyam Mishra, Shiv Shankar, Moti Yadav, Ravindra Rai and Ram Kripal Maurya, who were getting salary under the Rules, 1978 in the Junior High School, retired in the year 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012, respectively.

5. The institution was upgraded up to High School level under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act and was granted recognition up to the aforesaid level in the year 2006. After upgradation of the institution up to High School level, as there was no provision of creation of posts, therefore, in order to fill up the aforesaid vacant posts, due to retirement of five teachers as named above, who were drawing salary under the Rules, 1978, a permission was taken for advertising the aforesaid posts of four teachers. The District Basic Education Officer granted permission for advertisement by order dated 25.6.2015. Accordingly, the advertisement was published in two newspapers, namely, Aaj and Swatantra Chetna on 27.6.2015.

6. The petitioners, being duly qualified with a Graduation degree, B.Ed. training qualification, and having also qualified the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), were selected and appointed to the post of Assistant Teacher after undergoing due selection before the duly constituted Selection Committee. Their appointments were accorded approval vide order dated 25.08.2015, pursuant whereto the Committee of Management issued formal appointment letters of even date, i.e., 25.08.2015, in favour of the petitioners.

7. Thereafter, the candidates who had applied appeared before the duly constitut