JUDGMENT Hon’ble S.U. Khan, J.—Heard Sri Ravi Kiran Jain, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Ajay Rajendra, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Indra Sen, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 2. According to the petitioners (who are three in number) they were selected for appointment as teachers in Dayawati Modi Kanya Junior High Schools, Sikari Kalan, Modi Nagar, Ghaziabad by the Selection Committee on 1.8.1984 after following due procedure and thereafter on 6.8.1984 the manager of the School sent all relevant papers to Basic Shiksha Adhikar (B.S.A.), Ghaziabad for approval. The procedure of recruitment/ appointment in Junior High Schools in U.P. is governed by the Uttar Pradesh Recognised Basic Schools (Junior High Schools) (Recruitment and Conditions of Services of Teachers) Rules 1978. Sub Rule (3) and (4) of Rule 10 of the said Rules prescribe that the Selection Committee after the selection shall as soon as possible forward the list of the selected candidates together with the minutes of the proceedings of the committee to the management and the manager within a week from the date of receipt of the papers should send a copy of the list to the District Basic Education Officer. Under Rule 10 (5)(III) it is provided as under : “If the District Basic Education Officer does not communicate his decision within one month from the date of receipt of the papers under clause (4), he shall be deemed to have accorded approval to the recommendations made by the selection committee.” 3. On receipt of the of papers sent by the Manager regarding appointment of the petitioners, B.S.A. sent a communication on 18.8.1984 to the Manager requiring some further information, copy of which is Annexure CA-2 to the counter-affidavit filed by the State. It is unfortunate that neither in any of the paragraphs of the writ petition any mention of the said communication has been made nor its copy has been annexed alongwith the writ petition. 4. Manager of the school filed a representation before the Deputy Director of Education, Region (I) Meerut in respect of appointment of the petitioners. Copy of the representation filed by the Manager is Annexure-1 to the writ petition. In para 7 of the said representation it was mentioned that the B.S.A. through communication dated 18.8.1984 had asked for certain information. 4. Manager of the school filed a representation before the Deputy Director of Education, Region (I) Meerut in respect of appointment of the petitioners. Copy of the representation filed by the Manager is Annexure-1 to the writ petition. In para 7 of the said representation it was mentioned that the B.S.A. through communication dated 18.8.1984 had asked for certain information. It is further mentioned in the representation that on 23.8.1984 requisite information had been sent to the B.S.A. Thereafter it is mentioned that on 14.9.1984 B.S.A. disapproved the selection on the ground that in the interview no candidate belonging to reserved category was present. 5. Deputy Director of Education Region (I) Meerut decided the matter on 24.10.1985, copy of which decision is Annexure-2 to the writ petition. It is addressed to Additional District Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Ghaziabad. The Deputy Director held that the appointments would be deemed to have been approved under Rule 10(5) (III) of the Rules of 1978. 6. The grievance of the petitioners is that inspite of the order Deputy Director of Education dated 24.10.1985 salary was not paid to them. In this writ petition ad interim mandamus was issued on 12.12.1988 either to pay salary or show-cause. Thereafter, absolute interim mandamus was issued on 23.11.1987. Under the said interim order petitioners are receiving the salary. 7. The Deputy Director of Education in his order dated 24.10.1985 has not at all taken into consideration the objections which had earlier been raised by the Basic Shiksha Adhikari on 18.8.1984 and which according to the Manager were removed on 23.8.1984. These facts were mentioned in the representation itself. Thereafter, it was mentioned in para 8 of the representation that the Basic Shiksha Adhikari through letter dated 14.9.1984 had disapproved the selection and reply to the said letter had also been sent by the management on 25.9.1984. The Deputy Director of Education in his order dated 24.10.1985 Annexure-2 simply mentioned that objections raised by the B.S.A. through communication dated 14.9.1984 had been removed by the management through letter dated 25.9.1984 which was received in the office of B.S.A. on 29.9.1984. In view of this it is quite clear that the Deputy Director of Education did not appreciate the order dated 14.9.1984 in its correct perspective. It was an order of disapproval. In view of this it is quite clear that the Deputy Director of Education did not appreciate the order dated 14.9.1984 in its correct perspective. It was an order of disapproval. As within one months from receipt of papers by the Manager District B.S.A. had raised the objections (on 18.8.1984) hence Rule 10(5) (iii) was not attracted. 8. Accordingly, the matter is remanded to the Deputy Director of Education, Division (I) Meerut to decide the same again particularly taking into consideration the disapproval order dated 14.9.1984 and the earlier reply of the management dated 23.8.1984. The Deputy Director of Education shall pass reasoned order. Petitioners as well as the management of the School are directed to appear before the Deputy Director of Education on 9.5.2011. The matter shall be decided expeditiously preferably within two months therefrom. Petitioners and management on 9.5.2011 shall file all relevant objections and documents before the Deputy Director of Education including those documents which were earlier filed as they must now not be available with the Deputy Director of Education. It is clarified that all the documents pertaining to the selection, copy of objection by District B.S.A. dated 18.8.1984 copy of its reply by the Manager dated 23.8.1984 and copy of order of disapproval by District B.S.A. dated 14.9.1984 shall be filed by the petitioners. The Deputy Director of Education may call for any further documents from the petitioners, Manager or District B.S.A. The Deputy Director shall decide the validity of disapproval order dated 14.9.1984 passed by B.S.A. 9. Until decision of the Deputy Director of Education petitioners shall continue to work on the post on which they are working and be paid salary. In case matter is decided against the petitioners by the Deputy Director of Education then for a period of two months from the date of communication of the said order petitioners should be permitted to continue to teach and paid salary in order to enable them to seek remedy against the said order. 10. In case petitioners do not appear before the Deputy Director alongwith necessary papers on 9.5.2011 then this writ petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed. 11. Writ petition is accordingly, allowed with the above directions. —————