JUDGMENT : S.K. PHAUJDAR, J. 1. Through this writ petition, the Petitioner desired that a direction upon the Respondents be given to issue appointment letter to him and as the selection committee had already selected him and as the same was approved by the Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Varanasi. Further directions were sought to command Respondent Nos. 3 and 5 to permit the Petitioner to join the post of an assistant teacher in CT. grade in their institution and to pay him salary, according to law. 2. It was the case of the Petitioner that the institution in question, namely, Chintamani Rai Madhyamic Vidyalaya was a registered society and the institution run by it is also named Chintamani Madhyamic Vidyalaya, for imparting High School Education. The Petitioner claims that he was qualified and eligible for being appointed to the post of a C.T. grade teacher and a post of an assistant teacher in C.T. grade was created in September, 1986. The post was advertised. Several persons including the Petitioner responded and a selection committee was duly constituted comprising of the Manager, Principal and a representative of the Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari. The Petitioner was called for an interview on 16.9.1986 and he had appeared before the selection committee but the date of interview was postponed to 12.1.1987, when again the Petitioner appeared before the selection committee. He was selected by the selection committee and was informed by a letter dated 30.1.1987 indicating that his name was recommended for appointment against the post of an assistant teacher in C. T. grade and the recommendation was approved by the Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari, who had issued a direction to the Manager of the institution to issue appointment letter in favour of the Petitioner on probation for one year for the post of assistant teacher C.T. grade in the pay scale of Rs. 470-720. The Petitioner had gone to the institution on 31.3.1987 and again on 1.2.1987 and he was assured by the Manager and the Principal that appointment letter would be sent to him through post. But no such appointment letter was issued rather a sum of Rs. 20,000 was demanded from him for issuance of the letter. The Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari was approached and an F.I.R. was lodged at the concerned police station. But no such appointment letter was issued rather a sum of Rs. 20,000 was demanded from him for issuance of the letter. The Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari was approached and an F.I.R. was lodged at the concerned police station. The Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari sent a registered letter to the Manager directing issuance of the appointment letter within three days. The Petitioner also filed an injunction suit against the Manager and the Principal to restrain them from their illegal action and omission but on assurance by the Manager that the appointment letter would be given only after withdrawal of the suit, the Petitioner withdrew the suit. The Manager then demanded certificates and marksheets from the Petitioner and same were submitted to him. He was also forced, under the hope of the appointment, to execute a letter that the allegations in the F.I.R. made by him were not true. He also moved the D.I.O.S. but could not get the desired result. 3. The application was presented on 8.8.1988 and was finally admitted on 23.11.1988 and an interim order was recorded. The Respondent Nos. 3 and 5 were directed through an interim mandamus to issue letter of appointment to the Petitioner within six weeks from the date of service of a copy of the order or to show cause by a counter-affidavit within the same period. This order was reiterated on 17.9.1991 as till that date neither the appointment letter was issued nor any counter-affidavit was filed. It appears from the record that an appearance was made by Respondent Nos. 3 and 5 who had appealed for recall of the order dated 17.9.1991. Shri Ajay Kumar Dwivedi filed the application on their behalf. 4. A counter-affidavit was filed by the Principal of the institution. It was asserted by him that four posts of C.T. grade teachers were created in the institution in 1986 in addition to the already existing six posts of teachers including the Principal. The five teachers already existing were confirmed teachers in the C.T. grade of these five teachers none was of the Scheduled Caste. Accordingly, when four new posts were occurred one was to be filled in by a candidate belonging to the Scheduled Caste. In the advertisement, however, due to inadvertence, it was not mentioned that out of four newly created posts one was reserved for candidates of the Scheduled Caste. Accordingly, when four new posts were occurred one was to be filled in by a candidate belonging to the Scheduled Caste. In the advertisement, however, due to inadvertence, it was not mentioned that out of four newly created posts one was reserved for candidates of the Scheduled Caste. Accordingly, no candidate of the Scheduled Caste could apply against such vacancy. The Petitioner and three others were selected for appointment, but the Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari approved the selection only against three posts and accorded no approval to the appointment of the Petitioner who was selected for the fourth post. Some querry was made from the Assistant Director of Education (Basic), Vth Region, Varanasi, and the Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari by his letter dated 23.1.1987 informed the Manager of the institution that instructions with regard to the fourth post would be given to him later. A copy of this letter dated 23.1.1987 was annexed as CA-2. The advertisement in question was annexed as CA-1. It was further stated in the counter-affidavit that the Assistant Director of Education (Basic) by his letter dated 29/31.1.1987 directed the Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari to re-advertise the post for the Scheduled Caste candidates. This letter was appended as Annexure CA-3. It appears that the Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari instead of compliance of the direction given by the Assistant Director of Education, accorded approval to the illegal selection of the Petitioner. The Petitioner was not given an appointment as his selection was illegal and void as he was not a candidate of the Scheduled Caste. At no point of time, the Petitioner was assured of any appointment by the Manager or the Principal. The demand of illegal gratification was also a false allegation. It was also denied that the Petitioner was forced/induced to withdraw his suit or F.I.R. 5. The Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari also came up with a counter-affidavit. It was asserted that in response to the advertisement for four posts C.T. grade teacher in the institution, eight persons had applied and the selection committee had chosen four persons including the present Petitioner who was placed at serial No. 4 of the selection list. The Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari had written to the Management of the institution to appoint the Petitioner. It was stated that basically the writ petition was directed against Respondent Nos. 3 and 5. The Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari had written to the Management of the institution to appoint the Petitioner. It was stated that basically the writ petition was directed against Respondent Nos. 3 and 5. These answering Respondents had already issued a letter to the Management to appoint the Petitioner and as such no relief would be given against him. 6. A rejoinder affidavit was filed by the Petitioner to state that Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari had sanctioned all the four posts and in the selection process no Scheduled Caste candidate was available and all the four posts were directed to be filled in from the general category candidates. It was stated that the Secretary U.P. Basic Shiksha Parishad had issued a letter on 3.4.1986 directing that the posts be filled up from candidates of the general category on non-availability of reserved candidates on condition of carrying forward the post to be filled up from the reserved category as and when future vacancy occurred. This letter of the Secretary was appended as RA-2. This was a general direction issued prior to the present selection process. In a further rejoinder affidavit, the Petitioner took up a plea that the Regional Assistant Director of Education (Basic) had sent a letter to the Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari on 8.11.1988 whereby the compliance of the interim order of the High Court was directed. In this letter, defect was found in the selection process also and it was observed that Anand Kushal should have been placed at serial No. 3 instead of Amar Nath Dwivedi who should have come to serial No. 4. In the writ petition, Amar Nath Dwivedi was not made a party and the selection was not challenged on the ground of wrong marking. 7. In a subsequent counter-affidavit, the Principal reiterated that in his letter dated 3.4.1986 the Secretary U.P. Basic Shiksha Parishad (as per Annexure RA-2) had directed the carrying forward reserved vacancy for Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes and before that the employer was to ascertain that there was no Scheduled Caste candidate for appointment. He reiterated that the Additional Director of Education by his letter dated 31.1.1987 had clearly stated that the post was to be filled in by a candidate belonged to a scheduled caste community and a fresh advertisement was directed. 8. He reiterated that the Additional Director of Education by his letter dated 31.1.1987 had clearly stated that the post was to be filled in by a candidate belonged to a scheduled caste community and a fresh advertisement was directed. 8. The basic question that arises for consideration is whether out of four vacancies of newly created posts of assistant teachers in C.T. grade one post should have been reserved for a Scheduled Caste candidate. It was urged on behalf of the Petitioner that no reservation was required under the relevant rules. The Rules are contained in the U.P. Recognised Basic School Recruitment Rules of 1978. Rules simply speak of the procedure and qualification and the eligibility of the teacher. The question of reservation is to be guided by the general principles and policy regarding reservation of posts for Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes candidates. 9. In connection with the principles regarding reservation by attention was drawn to a Government Order dated 12.7.1978 bearing No. 2642/15-7-12(7)/74. It related to Recognised and Aided Private Schools regarding reservation for Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes. It was directed in this Government Order that for aided non-government institutions, it would be a condition for continuity of the aid that for appointment reservation would be made in terms of the rules. 10. In this connection, the U.P. Public Services (Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes) Act, 1994, was also placed before me. This Act, however, may not affect the advertisement which was issued prior to coming into force of the Act as observed by the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court in (1996) 3 UPLBEC 1869 . Reference was also made to a decision of the Allahabad High Court in 1977 (3) ALR 391. It was a case of selection of a teacher for appointment an approval by the D.I.O.S. The teacher started working though no formal appointment letter was issued. It was held that this teacher had acquired the status of a teacher and his services could not be terminated. 11. From the facts and circumstances pleaded in this case, it appears that four posts were duly advertised without any inkling that any one was reserved for Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribes or other Backward Classes. Out of many applicants, four persons were chosen and the Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari had approved the appointment of all. 11. From the facts and circumstances pleaded in this case, it appears that four posts were duly advertised without any inkling that any one was reserved for Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribes or other Backward Classes. Out of many applicants, four persons were chosen and the Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari had approved the appointment of all. At no earlier point of time, the management had indicated that one post should have been reserved for Scheduled Caste candidate. That objection was taken only when the approval of the appointment of the present Petitioner was given by the Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari. Correspondences are there on record to indicate that the reservation, if any, for S.C., S.T. and B.C. could be carried forward and that was the only practical solution instead of withholding appointment to the Petitioner. The paper in CA-2, a letter from the Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari addressed to the Manager of the institution, indicates that the Manager had informed the Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari that no Scheduled Caste candidates being available and none having come to attend the interview, the candidates at serial No. 4 was selected. It is true that there is a direction for re-advertisement at one point of time but this direction came long after the selection of the present Petitioner. 12. The writ petition stands allowed. The Respondent Nos. 3 and 5 are directed to issue appointment letter to the Petitioner and to permit him to join the post of an assistant teacher C.T. grade with effect from the date when the other three candidates selected in the same selection process had joined their posts. The Petitioner shall be paid his salary from that date from which his appointment is to take effect and payment shall be made lay the Respondents who are making payment to the other teachers. Arrears shall be paid within a period of six months and current payment from August, 1997, shall be paid on the date it becomes due. The Petitioner shall also be entitled to the other benefits that would have accrued to him from time to time during this period.