Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2007 DIGILAW 1098 (ALL)

SHEO KUMAR SINGH v. STATE OF U. P.

2007-04-23

RAKESH TIWARI

body2007
( 1 ) HEARD counsel for the parties and perused the record. ( 2 ) THIS writ petition has been filed for issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to pay salary to the petitioner of L. T. Grade teacher w. e. f. 16. 9. 92. It has further been prayed that respondent no. 2, the District Inspector of Schools, Ghazipur may be directed to accord approval to the appointment of the petitioner and not to interfere in the functioning of the petitioner as L. T. Grade Assistant teacher in the Institution. ( 3 ) THE case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as L. T. Grade Assistant teacher in Intermediate College, Karanda, District Ghazipur on 26. 9. 92 in the vacancy caused due to the promotion of one Sri Brij Raj Singh L. T. Grade teacher on the post of Hindi Lecturer by the Committee of Management of the Institution. The petitioner joined his duties on the same date i. e. 26. 9. 92 and the papers with regard to his appointment were forwarded on 21. 9. 92 by the Manager of the Institution to the D. I. O. S. for financial approval as required under the U. P. Secondary Education Service Commission Act. ( 4 ) THE grievance of the petitioner is that the D. I. O. S. has not accorded financial approval to the appointment of the petitioner till date. In this regard several reminders were sent to the D. I. O. S. by the petitioner as well as by the Committee of Management of the Institution, which have remained unactioned till date, hence this writ petition. ( 5 ) THE counsel for the petitioner submits that keeping the matter pending for financial approval with regard to the appointment of the petitioner for an unlimited period and not according approval to it is contrary to the provisions of Sub-section 2 of Section 9 (b) of U. P. Secondary Education Service Commission Ist Amendment Act, 1992; that the liability for payment of salary is of the State Government under the Payment of Salary Act, 1978; that action of the D. I. O. S. is contrary to the various provisions of Payment of Salary to the Teachers and other Employees Act, 1978; and that the work of teaching in the institution w. e. f. 26. 9. 9. 92 being taken from the petitioner without payment of his salary amounts to "begar" which is prohibited under Article 226 of the Constitution. ( 6 ) THE counsel for the respondents submits that so far as the promotion of Sri Brij Raj Singh is concerned, he was neither promoted on the post of Hindi lecturer from the post of Assistant Teacher L. T. Grade nor was getting salary of the post of Hindi lecturer nor any approval was accorded to his appointment in this regard; hence there was no question of vacancy of Assistant teacher caused on account of promotion of Sri Birjj Raj Singh. He also submits that Sri Brij Raj Singh filed Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 34992 of 1993 regarding his promotion before this Court which is pending; that the Committee of Management of the Institution has appointed the petitioner on the post of Assistant teacher against sanctioned post without approval of the D. I. O. S. , hence the appointment of the petitioner is illegal and is liable to be quashed. From the record it appears that neither there was any sanctioned post of Assistant teacher in the Institution in question at the relevant time nor as appears from the counter affidavit filed by the D. I. O. S. the petitioner could have been appointed against the post reserved for SC candidates. ( 7 ) THE contention of the counsel for the petitioner is that there was no Scheduled Caste candidate available for the post, hence the petitioner who was a candidate of general category was appointed on the post of Assistant teacher reserved for the Scheduled caste candidates. It further appears from the record that the petitioner has been appointed by back door entry in service and there was no transparency in the selection of the petitioner. ( 8 ) FOR the reason that there was no vacancy against which the petitioner was appointed, appointment of the petitioner was also not accorded any approval. Sri Brij Raj Singh was neither promoted on the post of Hindi lecturer from the post of Assistant Teacher L. T. Grade nor was getting salary of the post of Hindi lecturer nor any approval was accorded to his appointment in this regard; hence there was no question of vacancy of Assistant teacher caused on account of promotion of Sri Birjj Raj Singh. The Committee of Management of the Institution has appointed the petitioner on the post of Assistant teacher against sanctioned post without approval of the D. I. O. S. , hence the appointment of the petitioner is illegal. ( 9 ) IN the circumstances, no interference is called for in the matter under Article 226 of the constitution. The writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. .