By the Court.—This special appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the Hon’ble Single Judge dated 21.8.2015.

2. The facts giving rise to the present special appeal are as follows:

3. Abhay Nandan Inter College, Vishnu Mandir, Medical College Road, Gorakhpur is a recognized and aided Intermediate College, which claims to be a minority institution. The institution is stated to have passed an order for terminating the services of respondent Nos. 3 and 4, who were employed as Assistant Teacher on ad hoc basis. This order, according to the committee of management, was made in compliance to the order of the Hon’ble High Court passed in Writ Petition No. 36165 of 1995. The decision so taken by the committee of management was annulled by the District Inspector of Schools, Gorakhpur vide order dated 14.8.2015. The District Inspector of Schools also went on to cancel the advertisement which had been published for making fresh ad hoc appointment against the posts held by the aforesaid two respondents.

4. The committee of management not being satisfied with the order of the District Inspector of Schools, file Writ Petition No. 47407 of 2015. The Hon’ble Single Judge under the order impugned dated 21.8.2015 has recorded that the matter requires consideration and thereafter, on the statement made by the Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the committee of management, it has been recorded that it shall be open to the committee of management i.e. the petitioner to take work or not to take work from the private respondents, but they shall be entitled to their salary, which shall not be stopped. The committee of management has also been restrained from making any fresh selection on the post held by respondent Nos. 3 and 4.

5. On behalf of respondent Nos. 3 and 4 it is stated that the order has been passed on a statement made by counsel for the petitioner himself and therefore it does not lie in the mouth of the petitioner to challenge the direction for payment of salary even if the management decides not to take work from the teachers concerned and because there cannot be double payment of salary against the same post, there can be no valid objection to the further restrain on fresh appointments on the posts held by respondent Nos. 3 and 4.

6. In our opinion a very serious issue reflecting upon public money has arisen in the present appeal.

7. The right of the employer to take work or not to take work from his employee and to continue to make payment of salary without taking work is well recognized. But this general principle may not be applicable in respect of recognized and aided intermediate colleges and other such aided institutions where the liability of payment of salary is taken over by the State Government.

8. As a matter of fact in recognized and aided intermediate colleges and other such institutions, where liability of payment of salary is taken over by the State Government, namely, private aided degree colleges etc., there is a tripartite arrangement. The first party i.e. the employer is the management which has a right to appoint the employee after due procedure and to take work. Second party in the agreement is the teacher/employee, who works in such an institution, who has right to be paid his salary if his appointment is in accordance with law and there is no legal justification for withholding his payment even if the management does not take work from him, and there is a third party i.e. the State Government, which takes over the liability of payment of salary to the staff and teachers of such recognized and aided institutions. In the case of intermediate colleges such liability of payment of salary has been taken over by the State Government vide U.P. Act No. 24 of 1971.

9. We may record that the liability of payment of salary, which has been taken over by the State Government, is only in respect of teachers and staff who are appointed against sanctioned posts. The issue in that regard has been s