JUDGMENT Hon’ble Arun Tandon, J.—Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Committee of Management of Sarvodaya Mandir Inter College, Mahwatpur, Bawali, Baghpat through its Manager has filed this writ petition seeking quashing of the orer dated 1.9.2010 passed by the District Basic Education Officer with a further mandamus directing the respondents not to permit Manish Tomar, respondent No. 5 to work on the post of Assistant Teacher on the basis of compassionate appointment. 3. Facts in short leading to the present petition are as follows : 4. Father of respondent No. 5 (Manish Tomar) was appointed in the petitioner’s institution when the same was only a Junior High School. The institution at that stage was also aided. The institution came to be recognised as a High School on 11.7.1993 and thereafter as an Intermediate College in the year 1997. Recognition granted for the High School and Intermediate classes was admittedly Vitvihin. Father of respondent No. 5 expired on 25.8.2010 during harness. He was a teacher of the Intermediate College but was getting salary from the office of the Basic Shiksha Adhikari as the institution was receiving aid only up to the Junior High School level. 5. On the very next day, Manish Tomar is stated to have made an application for compassionate appointment and within two days thereafter, the Committee of Management of the institution passed a resolution offering him compassionate appointment as Assistant Teacher in the Intermediate College although he was not trained. The papers were not forwarded to the District Inspector of Schools for approval or for action being taken in accordance with law. For obvious reasons, the papers were forwarded to the Basic Shiksha Adhikari. The Basic Shiksha Adhikari with reference to the recommendation of the Regional Level Committee constituted under the Government order dated 31.3.1997 (Annexure 13 to the counter-affidavit) is stated to have passed an order on 1.9.2010 approving the said compassionate appointment. Within 24 hours thereafter, appointment letter was issued in favour of the petitioner to be precise on 2.9.2010 and on the same date the petitioner is stated to have joined the institution. The speed with which the proceedings have taken place are themselves sufficient to reflect upon the manner in which the petitioner was successful in influencing the authorities. 6. Within 24 hours thereafter, appointment letter was issued in favour of the petitioner to be precise on 2.9.2010 and on the same date the petitioner is stated to have joined the institution. The speed with which the proceedings have taken place are themselves sufficient to reflect upon the manner in which the petitioner was successful in influencing the authorities. 6. The petitioner joined in pursuance to the said appointment letter on 2.9.2010 and within one week thereafter made an application for transfer from the institution. This time the application was made before the District Inspector of Schools. The District Inspector of Schools is stated to have passed an order attaching the petitioner to Janta Vaidik Inter College, Baraut on 13.9.2010. The petitioner joined at Baraut on the same day and claimed to have worked till 9.11.2011. On which date order approving his appointment has been withdrawn by the authorities. The order withdrawing the approval of appointment has not been challenged till date. It is admitted on record that Manish Tomar is not working since then. 7. With the withdrawal of the order of approval the controversy qua appointment has been laid to rest. 8. This Court cannot however close its eyes to the facts as they exist on record whereby the Committee of Management, the petitioner, Basic Shiksha Adhikari and the District Inspector of Schools have among themselves created a situation for defrauding the public exchequer. Reasons for the aforesaid conclusion arrived at are as follows : 9. Once the institution is recognized as an High School and thereafter as Intermediate College, on the death of an employee during harness, an application for compassionate appointment can be made to the District Inspector of Schools only. Reference Regulations 102 to 106 of Chapter III of the regulations framed under the Intermediate Education Act, 1921. Merely because the institution is receiving aid up to the Junior High School level, it will not mean that the regulations framed under the Intermediate Education Act will not be applicable. At least no exception clause could be brought to the notice of the Court by the petitioner, the Standing Counsel or by the counsel for Manish Tomar. In respect of Intermediate Colleges, there is no Government order which provides for appointment of untrained person on compassionate ground as Assistant Teachers. 10. At least no exception clause could be brought to the notice of the Court by the petitioner, the Standing Counsel or by the counsel for Manish Tomar. In respect of Intermediate Colleges, there is no Government order which provides for appointment of untrained person on compassionate ground as Assistant Teachers. 10. So far as the Government order dated 31.3.1997 is concerned, on a simple reading of first paragraph of the Government order itself, it is apparently clear that it applies to recognized and aided Junior High Schools only. 11. What is worst is that within 7 days of the joining in the institution, the petitioner made an application before the District Inspector of Schools for his attachment elsewhere. Under the Intermediate Education Act there is a provision for transfer only. There is no provision of attachment from one Intermediate College to another but the District Inspector of Schools has not followed the law. He, for the reasons best known to him, within 24 hours of the receipt of the application passed an order for attachment in another Intermediate institution. Despite specific query of the Court neither counsel for Manish Tomar, nor the Standing Counsel could refer to any provision of the Intermediate Education Act or regulations framed thereunder wherein such attachment could be directed. This Court, therefore, holds that the order of attachment passed by the District Inspector of Schools is only an attempt to over reach the statutory provisions of the Intermediate Education Act and the regulations framed thereunder. 12. This Court is of the considered opinion that the education authorities who in collusion with the Committee of Management and Manish Tomar have created a situation where illegal appointment has been made and thereafter attachment order was issued, deserve to be dealt with firmly and for the purpose, following directions are being issued : 13. The entire salary paid to Manish Tomar (respondent No. 5) must be recovered equally from the petitioner, Committee of Management which had recommended the compassionate appointment of Manish Tomar, the Basic Shiksha Adhikari who approved the appointment and the District Inspector of Schools who issued the order of attachment. The recovery must be effected within one month from today, if already not recovered. The recovery must be effected within one month from today, if already not recovered. This Court further directs the Secretary (Secondary Education) to take all suitable action against the Regional Level Committee, the Basic Shiksha Adhikari and the District Inspector of Schools for the negation of the rules of law as per the statutory provisions applicable. 14. Writ petition is dismissed. 15. Interim order, if any, stands discharged. ———————