JUDGMENT : (Irshad Ali, J.) 1. Heard Shri Sanjay Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing for respondent nos.1, 3 and 4, Shri R.K.S. Suryvanshi, learned counsel for respondent no.2 and Shri O.P.M. Tripathi, learned counsel for respondent nos.5 and 6. 2. By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the selection of respondent no.6 on the post of Lecturer (Civic) treating the same to be filled up by way of direct recruitment, inasmuch as consequential orders passed by the District Inspector of Schools and Committee of Management. It has further been prayed that a writ of Mandamus be issued to the respondents to permit the petitioner on the post of Lecturer (Civics) in the College known as P.L.K.P. Inter College, Kalu Khera, Unnao by way of promotion as the same falls under 50 % promotion quota with effect from session 2001-02 with consequential benefits. It has further been prayed that a writ of Mandamus be issued to respondent nos.4 and 5 to restrain the respondent no.6 from functioning and discharging his duties on the post of Lecturer (Civics). 3. Facts of the case are that at Kalu Khera in District Unnao, there is a society registered under Society Registration Act, 1860 which runs and manages as educational institution in the name of P.K.L.P. Inter College. The institution is recognized under the provisions of U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921. The provisions of U.P. Highschool and Intermediate (Collage’s Payment of Salaries Act of the Teachers and others Employees) Act, 1971, inasmuch as the provisions of U.P. Secondary Education Services Selection Board Act as amended up-to-date are applicable to the said institution. It is the case of the petitioner that there are five sanctioned post of Lecturer in the instutition. Shri Chandra Prakash Tiwari, on attaining the age of superannuation retired from the post of Lecturer (Civics) creating a substantive vacancy on the post of Lecturer. In view of the fact that the post which came into existence coming under 50% promotion quota, the Principal of the institution sent papers to the District Inspector of Schools for grant of promotion to place the matter before the Regional Level Committee of the petitioner. The District Inspector of Schools vide letter dated 5.7.2003 asked the Manager of the Institution in regard to position of sanctioned post of Lecturer in the college in question. The District Inspector of Schools vide letter dated 5.7.2003 asked the Manager of the Institution in regard to position of sanctioned post of Lecturer in the college in question. No action whatsoever has been taken on the letter of the District Inspector of Schools by the Committee of Management. The Principal of the institution vide letter dated 3.1.2005 sent information to the effect that in the college there are five sanctioned post of Lecturer and further the post of Lecturer (Civics) which has fallen vacant is to be filled up by way of promotion by promoting the petitioner. The Manager of the College has sent a letter to the D.I.O.S. along with relevant documents as required for the purposes of promoting the petitioner to the post of Lecturer (Civics) as the same is to be filled in by way of promotion under promotional quota post. Vide order dated 19.1.2005, the D.I.O.S., Unnao had granted the selection grade to the petitioner on the post of Assistant Teacher, L.T. Grade. When no action was taken by the D.I.O.S. in the matter of the petitioner for the grant of promotion then the petitioner filed a representation to the D.I.O.S. praying that the petitioner’s promotion on the post of Lecturer (Civics) may be kindly considered and necessary order be passed, failing which the present writ petition has been filed challenging the selection and appointment of respondent no.6 by way of direct recruitment. 4. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the post of Lecturer in Civics comes under 50% promotional quota and it is statutory binding, effect upon the Committee of Management, District Inspector of Schools, Regional Level Selection Committee to fill up the vacancy by granting promotion of the Assistant Teacher in L.T. Grade qualified in the lower pay scale. Requisition if any sent for direct recruitment to the Selection Board through District Inspector of Schools is illegal and contrary to the statutory provisions provided under Rule 14 of the Rules of 1998. 5. He next submits that it is the District Inspector of Schools who has created chaos in the college by sending requisition of the post of Lecturer to the U.P. Secondary Services Selection Board and treating the post of Lecturer in English to be 6 posts sanctioned of the Lecturer. 6. 5. He next submits that it is the District Inspector of Schools who has created chaos in the college by sending requisition of the post of Lecturer to the U.P. Secondary Services Selection Board and treating the post of Lecturer in English to be 6 posts sanctioned of the Lecturer. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner next submitted that there are five sanctioned posts in the institution and at the relevant point of time, three posts were filled by way of 50% promotion and two vacancies were filled by the direct recruitment. He next submitted that the Committee of Management, on consideration of claim of the petitioner, sent papers through District Inspector of Schools to the Regional Level Selection Committee under Rule 14 of the 1998 Rules for the grant of promotion under 50% promotion quota. The consideration of the claim of the petitioner for regular promotion was pending consideration and on requisition sent by the Committee of Management and District Inspector of Schools, the Board selected respondent no.6 as Lecturer in Civics and made recommendation for appointment to the institution. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner next submitted that once the post is coming from 50% promotional quota and the claim of the petitioner was pending consideration, the recommendation of respondent no.6 was bad in law and being contrary to Rule 14 of the 1998 Rules. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner next submitted that there are five posts of Lecturer in the Institution namely, P.L.K.P. Inter College, Kalu Khera, Unnao out of which three posts are fell vacant under the category of promotion and two posts are fell vacant under the category of direct recruitment. 9. Learned counsel for the petitioner next submitted on 30.6.2001 the post of Lecturer (Geography) which was under the quota of direct recruitment, fell vacant on account of superannuation of Sri Siddhi Nath Misra but apparently no action was taken for filling up the said post through direct recruitment. In the meantime, on 30.6.2002 another post of Lecturer under the category of promotion quota fell vacant on account of retirement of Sri Chandra Prakash Tiwari. 10. In the meantime, on 30.6.2002 another post of Lecturer under the category of promotion quota fell vacant on account of retirement of Sri Chandra Prakash Tiwari. 10. Learned counsel for the petitioner next submitted that when the claim of the petitioner was processed and forwarded to the District Inspector of Schools for promotion on the post of Lecturer (Civics) on the recommendation of U.P. Secondary Selection Board, both posts were filled by direct recruitment in the year 2006 ignoring the claim of the petitioner for promotion. 11. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel submitted that under the 50% quota for direct recruitment only 01 teacher namely Sri Ravindra Nath Bajpai, Lecturer (Sanskrti) was working under the general category and under 50% promotional quota 3 Lecturers were working as such the promotional quota was fulfilled and therefore, the requisition has been submitted by the Manager for filing up 01 post in reserved category of Scheduled Caste and 01 post in reserved category of O.B.C Class, total 02 of posts of Lecturer under direct recruitment of 50% quota and out of actual created 5 posts of Lecturer 01 post falls under reserved category of Scheduled Caste and 01 post falls under reserved category of O.B.C. Class. 12. Learned Standing Counsel next submitted that the aforesaid requisition submitted by the Manager has been forwarded to Secretary, Secondary Education Service Selection Board, Allahabad by then then District Inspector of Schools and in pursuance of the panel receives from the selection Board the Manager has been directed to allow the joining of the selected candidates. Therefore, the action of the respondents is neither arbitrary nor irrational. 13. I have considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 14. Vide order dated 8.2.2021, this Court granted time to learned Standing Counsel to apprise this Court that whether there are six posts of Lecturer or five post of Lecturer. In compliance of the order dated 8.2.2021, learned Standing Counsel filed confidential letter dated 13.9.2022 before this Court, wherein, it has been stated that there are five sanctioned posts of Lecturer. 15. Perusal of the record reveals that there are five sanctioned posts of Lecturer in the institution. On attaining the age of superannuation, Shri Chandra Prakash Tiwari retired from the post of Lecturer (Civics) creating a substantive vacancy on the post of Lecturer. 15. Perusal of the record reveals that there are five sanctioned posts of Lecturer in the institution. On attaining the age of superannuation, Shri Chandra Prakash Tiwari retired from the post of Lecturer (Civics) creating a substantive vacancy on the post of Lecturer. In view of the fact that the post which came into existence coming under 50% promotion quota, the Principal of the institution sent papers to the District Inspector of Schools for grant of promotion to place the matter before the Regional Level Committee of the petitioner. The District Inspector of Schools vide letter dated 5.7.2003 asked the Manager of the Institution in regard to position of the sanctioned post of Lecturer in the college in question. Vide letter dated 3.1.2005 the Principal of the institution sent information to the effect that in the college there are five sanctioned post of Lecturer and further the post of Lecturer (Civics) which has fallen vacant is to be filled up by way of promotion by promoting the petitioner. The Manager of the College has sent a letter to the DIOS along with relevant documents as required for purpose of promoting the petitioner. Vide order dated 19.1.2005, the D.I.O.S. Unnao had granted the selection grade to the petitioner on the post of Assistant Teacher. 16. In regard to submission advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner that when the claim of the petitioner was processed and forwarded to the District Inspector of Schools for promotion on the post of Lecturer (Civics) on the recommendation of U.P. Secondary Selection Board, the post was filled by direct recruitment in the year 2006 ignoring the claim of the petitioner for promotion, learned Standing Counsel did not show any documents to establish that claim of the petitioner has been considered. 17. It is pertinent to note that almost all the information are with the inspector of the schools. The Inspector from his records can easily find out about the eligibility of the teachers for promotion, date of vacancy and the vacancies likely to fall in a recruitment year. In additional to above, the Board in respect of the direct recruitment and the joint Director of Education for promotion have the power under the provisions of the Act and the Rules to ask the Inspector of submit additional information, which they need in respect of the direct recruitment and promotion. 18. In additional to above, the Board in respect of the direct recruitment and the joint Director of Education for promotion have the power under the provisions of the Act and the Rules to ask the Inspector of submit additional information, which they need in respect of the direct recruitment and promotion. 18. In view of the schedule of the act and the rules, it is evident that the intention of the legislature is not to give freehand to the Management. It has to send only information to the Inspector and it does not have any authority either in the Principal Act or in the Rules for promotion of a teacher. It is simply duty to send all the information of the teachers who are eligible for promotion irrespective of the fact whether they have applied or not. 19. If any vacancy occurs in the promotion quota and any teacher in the institution is eligible for promotion in terms of Rule 14, then he has to be considered for promotion. In case the Management does not send the requisition, there are two options open to the Inspector (i) he can ask the Management to send the information and (ii) in the case it does not send, he can forward the name of the eligible candidates to the Committee Under Section 12 of the Act on the basis of the records of the institution as mentioned in Sub-rule (6) of Rule 4 of the Rules, 1998. 20. Neither the Committee of Management nor the District Inspector of Schools took any decision on the claim of the petitioner. Once the post under 50% promotion quota was vacant, it should have been filled up by promotion. The impugned order passed without considering the claim for promotion under 50% promotion quota is bad in law. 21. The appointment by way of direct recruitment is devoid of merits in view of the fact that the post of Lecturer in Civics was to be filled up by way of grant of 50 % promotion quota to the petitioner. The promotion is made under the statutory provisions of law under Rule 14 of the 1998 Rules. Therefore, the direct recruitment to the post in question cannot be made till a candidate for the grant of promotion is available in the institution. 22. In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed. The promotion is made under the statutory provisions of law under Rule 14 of the 1998 Rules. Therefore, the direct recruitment to the post in question cannot be made till a candidate for the grant of promotion is available in the institution. 22. In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed. Order dated 22.4.2006 passed by the Selection Board, letter of the District Inspector of Schools dated 11.5.2006 and resolution of the Managing Committee dated 14.5.2006 are hereby quashed. 23. However, the Regional Level Selection Committee is directed to consider the claim of the promotion of the petitioner under 50% promotion quota within a period of six weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. 24. It is further clarified that the promotion of the petitioner shall be considered from the first day of the year of recruitment and consequential benefits shall also be provided to him.