Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 600 (ALL)

RUMA KUMARI GUPTA v. STATE OF U. P.

2013-02-21

A.P.SAHI

body2013
JUDGMENT Hon’ble A.P. Sahi, J.—The dispute relates to selection and appointment on the post of Lecturer in English in an Intermediate College governed by the provisions of U.P. Secondary Education Services Selection Board Act, 1982 and the Regulations framed thereunder. Heard Sri Irhsad Ali, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri S.M. Ali for the respondent No. 6 and Sri S.R. Singh for the respondent No. 2. Learned Standing Counsel has been heard for the respondent Nos. 1, 3 and 4. It is not necessary to issue notice to the respondent No. 5 keeping in view the nature of the order that is proposed to be passed. 2. The undisputed facts are that the Committee of Management sent a requisition to the District Inspector of Schools for filling up of the vacancy of Lecturer in English that fell vacant on 30.6.2010 due to retirement of the permanent incumbent. This requisition, after transmission, was translated into a vacancy advertised by the U.P. Secondary Education Services Selection Board for being filled up by way of direct recruitment. The petitioner was, accordingly, selected for the said post and was placed in the institution on the post in question where she joined and started functioning. 3. The respondent No. 6 staked her claim for being promoted on the said post on the ground that the post of Lecturer (English) fell within the 50% promotion quota as envisaged under the U.P. Secondary Education Services Selection Board Act, 1982 read with 1998 Rules framed thereunder. The respondent No. 6 claimed that she was duly eligible and qualified and, therefore, the respondent Nos. 1 to 5 were bound to consider her claim of promotion and offer her the said post. 4. It is also undisputed that there are total number of 5 posts in the cadre of Lecturer in the institution and, accordingly, 3 of the said posts have to be filled up by way of promotion and 2 by direct recruitment. In the year of recruitment and on the date of occurrence of vacancy, 2 posts had already been filled up by way of promotion and one by direct recruitment. Accordingly, one post had to be filled by promotion and one by direct recruitment. It is in this background that the respondent No. 6 claimed her promotion. 5. In the year of recruitment and on the date of occurrence of vacancy, 2 posts had already been filled up by way of promotion and one by direct recruitment. Accordingly, one post had to be filled by promotion and one by direct recruitment. It is in this background that the respondent No. 6 claimed her promotion. 5. The claim of the respondent No. 6 came to be processed and the Committee of Management is stated to have moved an application for cancelling the requisition that was sent to the Board for holding selections on the post in question by way of direct recruitment. The request of the respondent No. 6 was turned down by the District Inspector of Schools and no action was taken by the respondent-Board that compelled the respondent No. 6 to approach this Court by filing writ petition No. 42476 of 2012. The petition was disposed of vide order dated 28.8.2012 directing the Regional Joint Director of Education to decide the matter. 6. Consequently, the impugned order has been passed whereby it has been found that the claim of the respondent No. 6 is genuine and she is entitled for being promoted. The requisition sent to the Board for direct recruitment has been found to be incorrect and, accordingly, directions have been issued to the District Inspector of Schools for taking appropriate steps for adjusting the petitioner, who has been selected by the Board against some other post. 7. Sri Irshad Ali, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the selections of the petitioner are not vitiated on merits and, therefore, she is entitled to continue to hold the post till her placement is adjusted in some other institution. He further submits that one of the findings recorded by the Regional Joint Director of Education that the respondent No. 6 is entitled to the benefit of reservation by way of promotion is erroneous and is not in accordance with the decision of this Court in Full Court of this Court in Hira Lal v. State of U.P. and others, 2010(6) ADJ 1 (FB). The third submission of Sri Irshad Ali is that there is no fault on the part of the petitioner and, therefore, her selection should be saved. 8. The third submission of Sri Irshad Ali is that there is no fault on the part of the petitioner and, therefore, her selection should be saved. 8. Having considered the aforesaid submissions, none of the arguments can be accepted even assuming for the sake of argument that the benefit of reservation is not available to the respondent No. 6. The said respondent is even otherwise entitled for being promoted. 9. In view of the undisputed facts as recorded herein above, the post admittedly fell within the promotion quota and the respondents were bound to consider the claim of the respondent No. 6. The Regional Joint Director of Education has, therefore, not committed any error in arriving at the conclusion that the claim of the respondent No. 6 deserves to be accepted. If the post fell within 50% promotion quota, the requisition sent to the Board for filling up the post by direct recruitment is invalid. The question that there was no fault on the part of the petitioner is absolutely irrelevant inasmuch as it is not an issue relating to the placement of the petitioner, but the issue is of the claim of the respondent No. 6 which has been defeated on account of an incorrect requisition. So far as the placement of the petitioner is concerned, it shall now be open to the respondent to consider the claim of the petitioner in the light of the decision of the Regional Joint Director of Education and the Full Bench decision in the case of Prashant Kumar Katiyar v. State of U.P. and others, 2013 (1) ESC 221 (All) (FB). The impugned order does not call for any interference. The writ petition lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed. ——————