JUDGMENT Hon’ble V.K. Shukla, J.—That present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, Mahendra Singh, claiming himself to be the Headmaster of Janta Uchchatar Madhyamik Vidyalaya Kamelpur District J.P. Nagar for following relief : (i) A writ, order or direction of suitable nature commanding the respondents to declare the Junior High School Section of Janta Uchchatar Madhyamik Vidyalaya Kamelpur District J.P. Nagar as an institution on the grant-in-aid within the purview of U.P. Junior High School (Payment of Salary to Teachers and Other Employees) Act, 1978 with all consequential benefits thereof w.e.f. 1.7.1984 (ii) A writ, order or direction of suitable nature commanding the respondents to disburse the regular monthly salary of members of the staff at the Junior High School Level from Government grant in accordance with the provisions of U.P. Junior High School (Payment of Salary to Teachers and Other Employees) Act, 1978 regularly every month and also to disburse arrears arising on such account from 1.7.1984 till date. (iii) Any other writ, order or direction as the petitioner be entitled in law. (III) Costs may be awarded in favour of the petitioner.” 2. Brief background of the case is that in the district of J.P. Nagar there is recognized educational institution run under the name and style of Janta Uchchatar Madhyamik Vidyalaya Kamelpur. Institution in question was earlier recognized upto the level of Junior High School under the name of Janta Junior High School Kamelpur District J.P. Nagar. Said institution was granted recognition as Junior High School by the orders of Regional Deputy Director of Education, Bareilly region, Bareilly on 11.4.1980. Institution in question was not at all in the grant-in-aid list of the State Government and was out side the purview of U.P. Junior High School (Payment of Salary to Teachers and Other Employees) Act, 1978. It has been stated by the petitioner that applications were invited for according consideration to the institution as a junior High School for being brought in grant-in-aid and in pursuance thereof petitioner’s institution applied for being brought on in grant-in-aid but application was processed at the district level and forwarded for consideration to superior authorities. It has been stated by the petitioner that applications were invited for according consideration to the institution as a junior High School for being brought in grant-in-aid and in pursuance thereof petitioner’s institution applied for being brought on in grant-in-aid but application was processed at the district level and forwarded for consideration to superior authorities. The said application remained pending with no order whatsoever having been passed thereon and with passage of time, the Committee of Management applied for according recognition as High School and institution in question was granted recognition as High School by the orders of Regional Secretary, Board of High School and Intermediate, Bareilly Region Bareilly on 28.7.1989 and thereafter followed the aforesaid order consequential order of District Inspector of Schools, Moradabad dated 10.8.1989 has been passed granting permission to run class IX from the year 1989 and recognition granted to High School is Vitta Vihin recognition in term of Section 7-AA and Section 7-BB added to the Intermediate Education Act, 1921 by means of U.P. Act No. 18 of 1987 w.e.f. 14.10.1986. Petitioner has further contended that various Junior High School have been brought in grant-in-aid list within the scope and ambit of U.P. Act No. 6 of 1979 but as far as petitioner’s institution is concerned, same has been left out, as such petitioner’s institution is liable to be included. 3. Counter-affidavit has been filed and thereafter rejoinder affidavit has been filed in the present case and after pleadings mentioned have been exchanged, present writ petition has been taken up for final hearing and disposal with the consent of the parties. 4. Sri Ashok Khare, Senior Advocate, contended with vehemence that institution in question is liable to be brought in grant-in-aid list of the State Government as various other Junior High Schools which were granted recognition after the petitioner’s institution have been included in the grant-in-list of the State Government and merely because Vitta-Vihin recognition has been granted at the High School Level, the Junior High School section can be still brought within the scope and ambit of U.P. Junior High School (Payment of Salary to Teachers and Other Employees) Act, 1978. In this background he has placed reliance on the judgment in the case of Committee of Management, Mata Tapeshwari Saraswati Vidya Mandir Uchchttar Madhyamik Vidyalaya Ghazipur and others v. State of U.P. and others, 2007 (1) ADJ 443 . 5. In this background he has placed reliance on the judgment in the case of Committee of Management, Mata Tapeshwari Saraswati Vidya Mandir Uchchttar Madhyamik Vidyalaya Ghazipur and others v. State of U.P. and others, 2007 (1) ADJ 443 . 5. Learned Standing Counsel on the other hand contended that once institution in question has been upgraded from Junior High School to High School Level then institution in question has lost its identity as Junior High School and by no stretch of imagination institution in question could be brought within the scope and ambit of U.P. Act No. 6 of 1979 and as such the writ petition as it has been framed and drawn cannot be accepted. 6. After respective arguments have been advanced, first question which is to be adverted to as to whether recognition which has been accorded to the institution in question, under Section 7A (a) of U.P. Act No. II of 1921 takes said institution in question outside the purview of U.P. Basic Education Act, 1972 and 1978 Rules and recognition of institution in question at High School level and Intermediate level is limited only for the purposes of examination and nothing beyond the same and the rest of the institution i.e. up to Junior High School, still remains to be governed under the provision as contained in U.P. Basic Education Act 1972 and 1978 Rules and other ancillary provisions. 7. In order to appreciate the respective arguments the provision as contained under U.P. Basic Education Act, 1972 and U.P. Recognized Basic (Junior High School) (Recruitment and Condition of Service of Teachers) Rules 1978 and U.P. Junior High Schools (Payment of Salaries of Teachers and other employees) Act, 1978 are being looked into. 8. Basic Education is defined under Section 2(b) of U.P. Basic Education Act as follows : Section 2(b) : “Basic Education” means education up to eight classes imparted in school other than High School or Intermediate College, and the expression “Basic School” shall be construed accordingly. 9. 8. Basic Education is defined under Section 2(b) of U.P. Basic Education Act as follows : Section 2(b) : “Basic Education” means education up to eight classes imparted in school other than High School or Intermediate College, and the expression “Basic School” shall be construed accordingly. 9. U.P. Recognized Basic (Junior High School) (Recruitment and Condition of Service of Teachers) Rules 1978 defines under Rule 2(e) and 2(g) “Junior High School” and "Recognized Schools” respectively as follows : Rule 2(e) : “Junior High School” means an institution other than High School or Intermediate College imparting education to boys or girls or both, from Class VI to VIII (inclusive) Rule (g) : “Recognized School” means any Junior High School not being an institution belonging to or wholly maintained by the Board or any local body recognized by the Board as such; 10. U.P. Junior High School (Payment of Salaries of Teachers and other Employees) Act, 1978 (U.P. Act No. 6 of 1979) defines, under Section 2(e) and 2(h) “Institution” and “Teacher” respectively as follows : Section 2(e) : “Institution" means a recognized Junior High School for the time being receiving maintenance grant from the State Government; Section 2(h) : “Teacher” of an institution means Headmaster or other teacher in respect of whose maintenance grant is paid by the State Government.” 11. By means of U.P. Act No. 34 of 2000, published in U.P. Gazette Part I, transitory provisions in shape of Section 13-A in respect of certain upgraded institutions has been inserted which is as follows : Section 13-A(1) : Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, the provisions of this Act, shall mutatis mutandis, apply, to an institution which is upgraded to High School or Intermediate standard and to such teachers and other employees thereof in respect of whose employment maintenance grant is paid by the State Government to such institution. (2) For the purposes of this section the reference to the students wherever they occur in Section 5 shall be construed as reference to the students of classes up to Junior High School level only. 12. (2) For the purposes of this section the reference to the students wherever they occur in Section 5 shall be construed as reference to the students of classes up to Junior High School level only. 12. After noticing aforementioned provisions, relevant provisions of U.P. Intermediate Education Act 1921 is being looked into : The word institution is defined in Section 2 (b) as follows : “2 (b) “Institution” means a recognised Intermediate College, Higher Secondary School or High School, and includes, where the context so requires, a part of an institution, and “Head of Institution” means the Principal or Head Master, as the case may be, of such institution; 13. The word recognition has been defined under Section 2 (d), which is quoted herein below : “2 (d) “Recognition” means recognition for the purpose of preparing candidates for admission to the Board’s examinations;” Power of Board : Subject to the provisions of Act, the Board has following authority among others : Section 7(4) : to recognize institution for the purposes of this its examination. 14. The instant case is concerned with the recognition of a Junior High School for imparting education in Higher classes of High School and Intermediate level. The provision for granting recognition to such institutions is provided in Section 7-A (a), which is quoted herein below : “7-A. Recognition of an institution in any new subject or for a higher class.— Notwithstanding anything contained in clause (4) of Section 7— (a) the Board may, with the prior approval of the State Government, recognize an institution in any new subject or group of subjects or for a higher class.” 15. The question which has been sought to be raised on the touchstone of the provisions applicable qua basic education and secondary education in recognized institution, already stands answered by this Court in the case of Dr. (Smt.) Sushila Gupta v. Regional Joint Director of Education, Kanpur Region, Kanpur and others, [ 2006 (1) ADJ 89 (All)] decided on 22.11.2005 and there is no occasion to take different view. Said judgment exhaustively deals with each and every aspect of the matter and also specifically deals with that recognition under Section 7(4) and Section 7-A(a) of U.P. Act No. II of 1921 does not make any difference qua the status of institution. Said judgment exhaustively deals with each and every aspect of the matter and also specifically deals with that recognition under Section 7(4) and Section 7-A(a) of U.P. Act No. II of 1921 does not make any difference qua the status of institution. Aforementioned judgment has answered the said question in affirmative by holding that where the respondents are proceeding to make an appointment on the post of the Head of the institution which is admittedly an upgraded institution, same can only be made under the provisions of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 and the Regulations framed thereunder and not at all under the provisions of U.P. Basic Education Act and 1978 Rules. Relevant extract of aforesaid judgment is being quoted below : “For the purposes of management of such a recognized institution, a Scheme of Administration has to be drawn up by which the institution shall be managed as provided under Section 16-A of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act. Thus, the provision of an approved Scheme of Administration is mandatory. The aforesaid is also evident from the detailed conditions required to be fulfilled for grant of recognition by the Board contained in Chapter-VII of the Regulations framed under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act. Regulation 9 of Chapter-VII provides as a condition precedent that the Scheme of Administration for managing the institution should be approved by the competent authority. The most relevant regulation for the purposes of the present controversy is Regulation 11 (b) of the said Chapter which provides for that the entire teaching staff of the institution, which means a recognized institution, shall be appointed in accordance with the qualifications for such Teachers as provided in Appendix-A of Regulation 1 of Chapter II of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act. Clause (c) of the said Regulation further provides that the institution shall be obliged to comply with the conditions of the education code and clause (d) of the said Regulation indicates that the institution shall be obliged to carry out all directions by the department. The aforesaid terms and conditions, therefore, apply with immediate effect upon recognition being granted by the Board. The Act also makes provisions for penal action in the event it is found that an institution has violated the aforesaid terms & conditions. The provision, which is relevant to the issue, is Section 16-D (3) (II). The aforesaid terms and conditions, therefore, apply with immediate effect upon recognition being granted by the Board. The Act also makes provisions for penal action in the event it is found that an institution has violated the aforesaid terms & conditions. The provision, which is relevant to the issue, is Section 16-D (3) (II). This provision empowers the Board to withdraw recognition on the ground that the Management has failed to appoint teaching staff possessing necessary qualifications or has retained in service teaching or non-teaching staff in contravention of the provisions of 1921 Act and the Regulations framed thereunder. The provisions of Section 16-G make it mandatory that every person employed in a recognized institution shall be governed by such conditions of service as may be prescribed by regulation. This is further fortified by another mandatory provision contained in Regulation 14 (g) of Chapter I which provides that the scheme shall also provide that all the terms and conditions of employment of the employees of the institution shall be governed by the provisions of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act and the regulations framed thereunder. The mode of appointment of the head of the institution and Teachers is provided in Chapter III and the qualifications to be possessed for being appointed in a recognized institution either by direct recruitment or otherwise shall be as provided in Appendix-A to Chapter II of the Regulations. The aforesaid provisions leave no room for doubt that the conditions of recognition mandate the compliance of the provisions of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act and do not make any exception for following the provisions of 1978 Rules for appointment of teachers in Junior High Schools. Learned Standing Counsel on the strength of the Government Order dated 24.11.2001 and the provisions of Section 7-AB has urged that the Teachers so appointed on part time basis in an unaided High School or Intermediate College have been exempted from the applicability of the Payment of Salaries Act, 1971 and the Selection Board Act 1982. The aforesaid submission in the present context, does not hold water inasmuch as the instant case is in respect of the appointment of the Head of the institution. The provisions of Section 7-AB apply only in respect of Teachers, who are appointed on part time basis under Section 7-AA. The aforesaid submission in the present context, does not hold water inasmuch as the instant case is in respect of the appointment of the Head of the institution. The provisions of Section 7-AB apply only in respect of Teachers, who are appointed on part time basis under Section 7-AA. Section 7-AA in turn does not make any provision for appointment of a part time Head of the institution. The said provision is only meant to enable the institution to bear the minimum expenses from its own sources and, as such, the appointment of these Teachers has been exempted from the rigors of Selection under the 1982 Act. The question of applying the Payment of Salaries Act does not apply as the part time Teachers have to be paid by the Management from its own sources and not from any Government grant-in-aid. This Court in the case of Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar Shiksha Samiti and others v. State of U.P. and others, 2005 (4) ESC 2715, has held that Section 7-AA does not make any provision for the appointment of the Head of the institution on part time basis. In these circumstances, there is absolutely no scope for the argument to be considered as raised on behalf of the respondents in this respect. Even otherwise, the nature and duties of the Head of the institution which are detailed in Regulation 10 of Chapter I do not indicate that the Head of the institution would be called upon to perform such duty on part time basis. Apart from this, Section 16 of the U.P. Secondary Education Services Selection Board Act, 1982 mandates and prohibits the selection and appointment of the teaching staff by any other mode and provides that all such appointments shall be made only on the recommendation of the Board. The terms and conditions of recognition of the institution clearly contain clause-5 specifying that a suitable Head of the institution shall be appointed in accordance with Rules. The Rules for appointing the Head of the institution and the qualifications in respect thereto have been indicated hereinabove. The recognition order and the Rules referred to hereinabove, do not provide for the appointment of the Head of the Institution under the Rules governing a Junior High School. The Rules for appointing the Head of the institution and the qualifications in respect thereto have been indicated hereinabove. The recognition order and the Rules referred to hereinabove, do not provide for the appointment of the Head of the Institution under the Rules governing a Junior High School. The Rules referred to in the order of recognition are, therefore, the Rules applicable in respect of recognized institution under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act and the Selection Board Act, 1982. The appointment of the Head of the institution, therefore, cannot be resorted to under the garb of a Government Order dated 24.11.2001 as suggested by the Respondents including the learned Standing Counsel. Even though it is not necessary to state the proposition that a Government Order cannot have a overriding effect over the provisions of the Act, yet it is necessary to reiterate the same in view of the submissions advanced on behalf of the respondents. The decisions of the Apex Court, therefore, need to be referred at this stage. In the case of Union of India and others v. A.K. Roy, (1986) 1 SCC 675 , the Apex Court has held that a piece of subordinate legislation in the shape of a notification cannot override Rules Statutorily made governing the conditions of service. In the case of K. Kuppu Swami v. State of Tamil Nadu, (1998) 8 SCC 469 , has held that statutory rules cannot be over ridden by executive orders or executive practice. In the instant case, the Government Order dated 24.11.2001 does not either expressly or impliedly amend any or all the provisions which have been taken note of hereinabove. Even otherwise the Government Order cannot override these statutory rules as interpreting in such a way would amount to negating all the provisions that define and control the terms and conditions of an institution recognized under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921. The Government Order cannot run counter to the provisions of the Act and the Regulations so long as the provisions exist on the Statute book and the Government Order cannot be permitted to make room for inconsistency in such matters. The question that has to be addressed to in these 2 writ petitions is in respect of the status of the institution. The question that has to be addressed to in these 2 writ petitions is in respect of the status of the institution. Before the coming into force of 1982 Act which made a provision for the first time for holding selections in High Schools and Intermediate Colleges recognized under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, the institutions up to the level of Junior High School were upgraded and upon a up gradation as a High School or Intermediate College as the case may be, the employees of such institutions were given the benefit of up gradation and were absorbed as employees of the High School and Intermediate College respectively in terms of the provisions contained in Regulation 4 of Chapter II of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921. After the coming into force of the 1982 Act, no appointment to the post of Teachers or Head of the institution could be made except upon the recommendation of the Commission presently known as the Selection Board, as per Section 16 of the said Act. What comes in between is the consideration the impact of recognition granted to a Junior High School to run High School and Intermediate classes under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act and the Regulations framed thereunder. This question arose in a matter in the year 1979 when the Selection Board Act 1982 had not been enacted by the legislature. The question of up-gradation of an institution to the level of High School and Intermediate College was considered in detail vis-a-vis the applicability of the Payment of Salary Act. Needless to mention that in respect of Teachers of High Schools and Intermediate level, U.P. Act No. 24 of 1971 is applicable for the purposes of payment of salary whereas in respect of Junior High Schools, U.P. Act No. 6 of 1979 has been made applicable. This Court finding a conflict between 2 Division Benches referred the matter to a Full Bench which decision is reported in State of U.P. and others v. District Judge, Varanasi and others, 1981 UPLBEC 336, wherein this Court went on to hold as follows : “17. A basic school or a Junior High School is thus different from a High School or an Intermediate College. A basic school or a Junior High School is thus different from a High School or an Intermediate College. On the plain language of these definitions the same institution cannot be called a basic school or a Junior High School as well as a High School or an Intermediate College. Each one has a distinct legal entity. On a basic school or a Junior High School being upgraded as a High School or an Intermediate College the identity of the institution known as basic school or Junior High School is lost. It ceases to exist as a legal entity and in its place another institution with a new legal entity comes into being. One cannot be equated with the other. In this connection reformance may also be made to the decision of the Supreme Court in Commissioner, Lucknow Division v. Km. Prem Lata Misra, (AIR 1971 SC 334). It would further be seen that administration including constitution of Committee of Management of an institution recognized under U.P. Act 11 of 1921 is to be carried out in accordance with a Scheme of Administration prepared under Section 16-A of the said Act and this section does not apply to a basic school or a Junior High School. For all these persons and in the absence of any specific provisions in this behalf none having been pointed out to us maintenance grant payable to the basic school or Junior High School which has been upgraded as High School cannot and does not automatically became payable to the recognized High School. Suppose after a Basic School or a Junior High School has been upgraded as a recognized High School, the State Government stops payment of the amount of maintenance grant which was being paid to the basic school, can the recognized High School claim as a matter of right that the said amount has become automatically payable to it. The answer, in the absence of any specific provision permitting such automatic formation, so to speak till, in our opinion, have to be in the negative. Such a recognized High School will have to wait maintenance grant payable to it as a recognized High School has been fixed as contemplated by Section 2 (c) of U.P. Act 24 of 1972. The answer, in the absence of any specific provision permitting such automatic formation, so to speak till, in our opinion, have to be in the negative. Such a recognized High School will have to wait maintenance grant payable to it as a recognized High School has been fixed as contemplated by Section 2 (c) of U.P. Act 24 of 1972. Consequently, even if the maintenance grant payable to a basic school or a Junior High School is continued to be paid to those who were managing the erstwhile basic school or Junior High School it cannot be said that the upgraded recognized High School is receiving any maintenance grant as defined in Section 2 ( c) of U.P. Act 24 of 1971.” It was further held that in such a situation the grant-in-aid which was available to a Junior High School does not automatically become available to High School or Intermediate College. Realizing this difficulty having arisen on account of the interpretation given by the Full Bench, an amendment was brought about by introducing Section 13-A in U.P. Junior High Schools (Payment of Salaries of Teachers and other Employees) Act, 1978 (U.P. Act No. 6 of 1979), which is to the following effect : [“13-A. Transitory provisions in respect of certain upgraded institutions.— (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, the provisions of this Act shall, mutatis mutandis apply, to an institution which is upgraded to High School or Intermediate standard and, to such teachers and other employees thereof in respect of whose employment maintenance grant is paid by the State Government to such institution. (2) For the purposes of this section the reference to the students wherever they occur in Section 5, shall be construed as reference to the students of classes up to Junior High School level only.] This Section was introduced as a transitory provision in order to meet the contingency of an institution which was receiving grant-in-aid up to the Junior High School level but was not extended this benefit of the level of High School. This was consciously done by the legislature keeping in view the difficulties that had arisen in such a situation and in view of the Full Bench decision referred to herein above. However, observations made by the Full Bench to the effect that the Junior High School looses its identity when a High School comes into existence, still holds the field. This was consciously done by the legislature keeping in view the difficulties that had arisen in such a situation and in view of the Full Bench decision referred to herein above. However, observations made by the Full Bench to the effect that the Junior High School looses its identity when a High School comes into existence, still holds the field. No amendment has been brought about by the legislature in the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 to exclude the applicability of the Act on the employees of such an upgraded institution. It is in the aforesaid back ground that the impact of recognition having been granted to the institution in question has to be considered. Copies of the recognition orders as communicated to the institution in question dated 1.8.1992 and 14.9.1995 have been handed down to the Court about which there is no dispute. A perusal of the order dated 1.8.1992 indicates that the recognition had been granted by the State Government on the recommendation of the recognition Committee and the U.P. Board of High School and Intermediate Examinations under Section 7-A (a) of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act. One of the conditions of the said recognition is that in future only part time Teachers shall be appointed for teaching in the classes which will come into existence as a result of the said recognition. Part time teachers are appointed under Section 7-AA of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921. The recognition order further provides that one Headmaster/Principal shall be appointed in accordance with Rules. It further provides that all financial liabilities in respect of such appointments shall be borne by the management itself. In essence, the recognition is an unaided recognition. The recognition for running Intermediate classes vide order dated 14.9.1995 is also to the same effect. A perusal of the aforesaid documents and the provisions of Section 2 (b) and 2 (d) coupled with the ratio of the decision of the Full Bench referred to herein above, it is evident that the institution binds itself to be governed by the provisions of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act and the Regulations made thereunder. A perusal of the aforesaid documents and the provisions of Section 2 (b) and 2 (d) coupled with the ratio of the decision of the Full Bench referred to herein above, it is evident that the institution binds itself to be governed by the provisions of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act and the Regulations made thereunder. The recognition and financial aid are 2 different things; the institution which has been recognized as High School or Intermediate College may not be receiving grant-in-aid and in such a situation it is only the Payment of Salaries Act i.e. U.P. Act No. 24 of 1971 would not be applicable, but after having been recognized by the State Government under Section 7-A (a) the institution is governed by the provisions of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act and the Regulations framed thereunder. As a necessary corollary to the same, since the appointments to the post of Teachers have to be made by way of selection and recommendations under the 1982 Act, the said Act would also apply to the institution. Learned Standing Counsel for the State invited the attention of the Court to a Government order dated 24.11.2001 which provides that the matters relating to the service conditions of such employees of an upgraded institution shall continue to be dealt with by the Basic Education Officer and an action required to be taken would be under 1978 Rules pertaining to the employees of a Junior High School. It further indicates that for administrative purposes, even though the junior High School and the upgraded institution are being run under a single Management, they shall be treated to be different Units. There is another provision in the said Government Order indicating the applicability of the Rules pertaining to compassionate appointment. The aforesaid Government Order became subject matter of scrutiny in 2 decisions of this Court. Clause 5 of the said Government order was found to be in consistent with the provision of U.P. Intermediate Education Act and was held to be ultra vires in the decision of Ramesh Singh v. State of U.P. and others, in Writ Petition No. 17422 of 2003 decided on 23.5.2003. Clause 5 of the said Government order was found to be in consistent with the provision of U.P. Intermediate Education Act and was held to be ultra vires in the decision of Ramesh Singh v. State of U.P. and others, in Writ Petition No. 17422 of 2003 decided on 23.5.2003. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has brought to the notice of the Court the Government Order dated 23.11.2001 issued by the Principal Secretary, Education, in respect of the dependents of Teachers, who have died-in-harness while serving in the primary section attached to an Intermediate College. This Government Order clearly recites that the primary sections attached to Intermediate Colleges are part and parcel of the institution and, as such, the dependents of such Teachers, who have died-in-harness while working in the primary section are entitled to seek appointment from the District Inspector of Schools for which Rules and Regulations are contained in Chapter III of the Regulations framed under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act. Thus, even for primary schools the State Government recognizes the applicability of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act on such Teachers. The said Government Order is only by way of an illustration, as the present case is a case of upgradation of a Junior High School to High School. The Intermediate Education Act 1921 makes a provision for consideration of promotion of Teachers in JTC and BTC grade to CT grade. Since CT grade has been declared to be a dying cadre, therefore, the said benefits are available as a LT grade Teachers. This provision is contained in Regulation 7 of Chapter II of the Regulations framed under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act. The regulations had been deleted but have been reintroduced through a Government Order dated 26.2.2003 and 1.12.2003 whereby the aforesaid Regulations were amended. The said amendments are subject matter of controversy before this Court in Special Appeal No. 931 of 2005 in which orders are operating in favour of such promotees in the LT grade. The reference to the aforesaid is relevant in the context of the decision of this Court in the case of Samantika Chaterjee v. R.I.G.S., Allahabad, (1990) 1 UPLBEC 289, and in the case of Smt. Aruna Ghosh reported in 1995 (3) ESC 92. The reference to the aforesaid is relevant in the context of the decision of this Court in the case of Samantika Chaterjee v. R.I.G.S., Allahabad, (1990) 1 UPLBEC 289, and in the case of Smt. Aruna Ghosh reported in 1995 (3) ESC 92. The aforesaid decisions consider the impact of the amendment brought about in the word institution in Section 2 (b) of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act and qualified that the previous decisions as referred to therein including the decision in the case of Pramila Mishra by the Apex Court had not considered the aforesaid amendment brought about in the definition referred to herein above. The question as to whether what would be the provisions applicable upon an up gradation and have been recognized under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act even if remain unaided arose in the case of Shiksha Prasar Samiti Babhnan, district - Gonda v. State of U.P. and others, which decision is reported in (1986) UPLBEC 477. The Court clearly held that once the institution was upgraded, the mode and Rule of recruitment was to be governed by the provisions of the Removal of Difficulties Orders, 1981 and the provisions of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 read with the provisions of U.P. Act No. 5 of 1982. A question arose with regard to applicability of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act in respect of appointment of class 3 post in an upgraded institution. This Court clearly ruled that the provisions of the Intermediate Education Act 1921 would apply and followed the ratio laid down in the case of Shiksha Prasar Samiti (supra). The decision is reported in 2000 (4) ESC 2768, R.C. Sharma v. State of U.P. and others. This issue was further raised in the case of Vishwanath Singh v. District Inspector of Schools, Gorakhpur and others, 1995 (1) UPLBEC 269. In para 12 of the said decision, the Court clearly ruled that in case the institution is upgraded to High School then it will be governed by the provisions of U.P. Intermediate Education Act instead of other provisions which might have been applicable earlier to the Teachers of the Junior High School. Once the institution is recognized under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, the institution binds itself with the terms and conditions of recognition which includes the applicability of the Act itself. Once the institution is recognized under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, the institution binds itself with the terms and conditions of recognition which includes the applicability of the Act itself. It is not open to the institution to change its option in respect of the applicability of Rules and Regulations in view of the binding force of the Act which provides that an institution so recognized, shall be governed by the provisions of the same Act. The Intermediate Education Act does not carve out any exception for the applicability of Rules to the employees and the institution of the earlier Junior High School which stands upgraded. In the recent case namely Shree Krishna Tripathi and another v. District Basic Education Officer, Kanpur Nagar, and another, a single Judge passed an order allowing a class-III employee to continue up to the age of 60 years, who had been appointed as an employee of an earlier Junior High School. The institution was upgraded as a High School but was unaided. The learned single Judge allowed the continuance of the class-III employees up to the age of 60 years which provided under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921. The State went up in Appeal being Special Appeal No. 170 of 2005 which appeal is pending in which on 18.2.2005 the following order was passed : “This appeal and the application is preferred from an order of Hon’ble Single Judge passed on 13.1.2005 whereby opposite party No. 1, who was the writ petitioner in the Court below, was allowed to continue to serve the School in question up to the year 2006 when he would attain the age of 60 years. The controversy arises because of a Vitta Vihin i.e. grantless upgradation and recognition granted to the School by an order, which is annexed to page 64 of the Annexures to the papers put before us, the said order being of 19.2.97. The argument of the appellants before us has run on this basis that as the recognition of the higher and upgraded status was granted without aid, it left the school to formulate its own administrative procedure and appointment without almost any supervision so far as the higher classes are concerned. The argument of the appellants before us has run on this basis that as the recognition of the higher and upgraded status was granted without aid, it left the school to formulate its own administrative procedure and appointment without almost any supervision so far as the higher classes are concerned. However, as far as the junior school is concerned, the school is wholly unaided and, therefore, the salary of opposite party No. 1 would be a burden on the Board, which is received for the lower class of the School. As such, the appellants feel aggrieved and their case that without the employee like opposite party No. 1, works in the junior section, his conditions of service including payment and retirement age should be governed by the U.P. Recognised Basic School Employees Rules, 1984 and not by the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921. The opposite party No. 1 has argued before us that after granting of the upgraded status whether such grant is Vitta Vihin or without aid, the whole institution gets an upgraded status and, therefore, the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 would be applicable for all employees whether working in upper classes or lower ones. There are certain authorities, which are before us today and which do support the case that once the institution is upgraded, it is so for all purposes and for all its parts and becomes completely separate entity; the case of State of Uttar Pradesh and others v. District Judge, Varanasi and others, 1981 UPLBEC 336, at paragraph 17 supports this proposition. In the judgment, under appeal, a reliance has been placed upon the case of Shiksha Prasar Samiti, Babhanan, District Gonda v. State of U.P. and others, 1986 UPLBEC 477, which also supports this proposition. So far as our view at present is concerned, we do not find that there is any specific rule or any specific law to this effect, which would support the case of only controversial upgradation of School in case the upgradation is granted without any State aid. From the practical view to the situation, it appears that the employee, who is a Clerk has been reported to duty even during and after 2004 i.e. after his attainment of the age of 58 years. Probably, he has not received any salary as yet. From the practical view to the situation, it appears that the employee, who is a Clerk has been reported to duty even during and after 2004 i.e. after his attainment of the age of 58 years. Probably, he has not received any salary as yet. In our prima facie view, the case leans very heavily in favour of opposite party No. 1, but not quite so heavily as for us to dismiss the appeal here and now. However, opposite party No. 1 deserves a very strong interim order. As such, we direct that notwithstanding pendency of this appeal, opposite party No. 1 be permitted to work for the post in which he was working before he attained the age of 58 years and such permission be continued to be accorded to him until he attains the age of 60 years. This order, needless to say, will bind all concerned including School Management, appellants, the Government and all its wings. If and when, the appeal is decided, the Court of appeal will have full jurisdiction to pass an order in accordance with law, but we specifically permit opposite party No. 1 to withdraw appropriate of salary, as if the appeal had been decided in his favour and all arrears of salary be paid to opposite party No. 1, positively, within a month. The application for compliance, if any, will be made before the Hon’ble Single Judge. It is, thus, clear from all the decisions cited herein above and the provisions discussed herein above that a Junior High School upgraded to the High School/Intermediate level, the institution is governed by the provisions of U.P. Intermediate Education Act and Service Rules as applicable to such institution, have to be applied. There is no distinction drawn between an aided or an unaided school. The recognition of the institution is by itself sufficient to exclude the applicability of the laws governing Junior High School once the institution is upgraded. It is for this reason that a special transitory amending provision was brought in by way of Section 13-A in U.P. Act No. 6 of 1979 discussed herein above to enable such upgraded institution to continue to receive the grant-in-aid that they were receiving at the level of Junior High School. It is for this reason that a special transitory amending provision was brought in by way of Section 13-A in U.P. Act No. 6 of 1979 discussed herein above to enable such upgraded institution to continue to receive the grant-in-aid that they were receiving at the level of Junior High School. In view of the conclusions and findings recorded herein above, the issue raised on behalf of the petitioner has to be answered in the affirmative in favour of the petitioner. Consequently, the institutions where the respondents are proceeding to make an appointment on the post of the Head of the institution which is admittedly an upgraded institution, can only be made under the provisions of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 and the Regulations framed thereunder coupled with the provisions of the U.P. Act No. 5 of 1982 and such other provisions that are consistent with the law laid down herein above.” 16. Now coming to the fact of the present case here institution in question has been upgraded from Junior High School to High School and once institution in question has been upgraded then by no stretch of imagination provisions of U.P. Basic Education Act, 1972 are applicable and institution in question cannot be brought within the scope and ambit of U.P. Act No. 6 of 1979. Section 13-A introduced in U.P. Act No. 6 of 1979 is a special transitory amending provision to enable such upgraded institution to continue to receive the grant-in-aid that they were receiving at the level of Junior High School. In this background once policy decision has been taken and institution in question no more remains a Junior High School and does not fall within the scope and ambit of definition of institution defined in U.P. Act No. 6 of 1979 wherein institution has been categorically defined that institution means a recognized Junior High School for time being received maintenance grant from the State Government and 1978 Rules, wherein junior high school and recognized schools has been defined. Judgment in the case of Committee of Management, Mata Tapeshwari Saraswati Vidya Mandir Uchchttar Madhyamik Vidyalaya Ghazipur and others v. State of U.P. and others, 2007 (1) ADJ 443 will not come to the rescue of petitioner, inasmuch as, therein Managing Committee of the institution had filed writ petition questioning the validity of the condition 2(13) of the Government Order dated 7.9.2006 issued by the State Government as well as condition No. 12 of the advertisement dated 9.9.2006 issued by the Directorate of Basic Education and therein the Full Bench judgment of this Court, which holds the field has not at all been placed. 17. In the State of U.P. institutions are categorized as per different stage of education being imparted to the students. Secondary and Primary schools are categorized as belonging to the pre-basic stage, junior basic (Primary) stage, senior basic (Junior high school) stage and Higher secondary stage Pre-basic stage refers to nursery education. Junior Basic refers to Classes I to V, Senior basic (Junior High School) stage refers to Classes VI to VIII the higher secondary stage is comprised of two stages, namely high school stage comprising classes IXth and Xth and Intermediate stage comprising Classes XIth and XIIth. Prior to 1972 the basic schools were controlled either by the Zila Parisad and Nagar Palika or were under private management recognized by the appropriate authority and in some cases Primary section was being run alongwith the junior high schools, higher secondary and intermediate section. The recognition of the institutions and service conditions of the teachers were governed under the provisions of the Education Code. In 1972, the U.P. Basic Education Act was enacted and came into force from 17.8.1972 and after enforcement of U.P. Basic Education Act Board was constituted and since then the basic education is being organized, coordinated and controlled by the said Board and for secondary education there has been Madhyamik Shiksha Parisad U.P. at Allahabad established under the provision of U.P. Act No. II of 1921. Recognizing body qua basic education and secondary education are all together different to. 18. Recognizing body qua basic education and secondary education are all together different to. 18. Full Bench of this Court has considered all these question in the case of State of U.P. v. District Judge, Varanasi, 1981 UPLBEC 336 that once institution in question was upgraded from Junior High School to High School then it goes outside scope and ambit of U.P. Basic Education Act 1972 and the Status of the institution as junior high schools is lost. Section 13-A of U.P. Act No. 6 of 1979 is merely transitory saving provision in this background prayer which has been made by the petitioner cannot be accorded. 19. In terms of observation made above, present writ petition is dismissed. ————