1. The petitioner submits that the appointment order on the post of Upper Division Teacher (Physics) has not been issued to him in spite of his being selected by a competent selection committee and his representation was not considered by the respondents in spite of the orders of this Court.

2. The petitioner applied for the post of Upper Division Teacher in Physics in the respondent No.3 - School. He was interviewed along with other candidates by the selection committee of the school. The contention of the petitioner is that he was placed at serial No.1 in the merit list. The petitioner submits that he was selected by a committee constituted under Rule 13 of the Madhya Pradesh Ashashkiya Sikshan Sanstha (Adhyapakon Tatha Anya Karmchariyon Ke Bharti) Niyam, 1979 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules').

3. The respondents have refused to issue appointment order to the petitioner on the ground that Rule 13(2) provides that no business shall be transacted at a meeting of the committee unless the Chairman, expert and at least two members be present thereat. Rule 13 relates to selection committee of the Secondary School and Rule 12 relates to Institutions other than Secondary School and a non-Government Educational Institute for higher education. In the Hindi version of these Rules, Rules 12 and 13 provide that the President of the body and minimum two members should be present. Hindi and English text of Rule 13 is reproduced below :

"13.(1) For every Secondary School there shall be a selection committee consisting of –

(a) the Chairman to be nominated by the Institution and

(b) members -

(i) The Divisional Superintendent of Education or his nominee;

(ii) One nominee of the management;

(iii) One expert in the subject concerned to be nominated by the Divisional Supertendent of Education.

(2) No business shall be transacted at a meeting of the committee unless the Chairman, expert and at least two members be present thereat".

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the case of the petitioner is governed by Rule 13 of the Rules. There is a definite discrepancy in Hindi version and English version of the Rules. In the English version, the presence of expert is mandatory, whereas in Hindi version presence of Chairman and -two members is mandatory. Since the Official Language of the Madhya Pradesh State is Hindi, therefore, the provisions of Rule 13 should be followed. As in the selection committee, the expert was not present but Chairman and two members were present, the petitioner's case cannot be rejected on the ground of non-compliance of sub-rule (2) of Rule 13.

5. From perusing the Official Gazette, dated 16th May, 1979, there is a difference in Hindi and English version of text in Rule 13(2) of the Rules. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the rules in English are translation of the Hindi rules cannot be enforced. The original script of the Rules is in Hindi and the selection committee was duly constituted according to Hindi text of Rule 13.

6. Article 345 of the Constitution of India provides that every State can adopt Official Language. The State of Madhya Pradesh has passed the Madhya Pradesh Official Language Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). According to Section 2 of the Act, 'Hindi' means Hindi the Devanagri Script. Section 3 speaks of that Official Language for official purposes of the State is Hindi. Section 4 relates to Language to be used in Bills, etc. Section 4 provides that the language shall be Hindi from the date the State Government has issued the notification. Vide Notification No. 1381-216-XX-CC, the State Government has appointed the 1st June, 1963, as the date from which Hindi Language shall be used in all the items specified in the Schedule. The Schedule is reproduced below :-

"Schedule

(a) All Bills to be introduced or amendment thereto be moved in each House of the State Legislature.

(b) All Acts passed by each' House of the State Legislature.

(c) All Ordi