Court No. - 18 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1846 of 2010 Petitioner :- Ram Ashrey Mishra Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Others Petitioner Counsel :- Rahul Jain Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Pankaj Mithal,J.
Heard Sri Rahul Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned Standing Counsel, who has accepted notice on behalf of
respondents.
The petitioner is an Assistant Teacher in the Sarvajanik Inter
College, Bhikhnapur, Kanpur Dehat. The Committee of
Management of the institution resolved to terminate the services of
the petitioner but the proposal was disapproved by the U.P.
Secondary Education Service Selection Board (hereinafter referred
to as the ‘Board’). The order of disapproval was challenged by the
Committee of Management by filing a writ petition. The writ
petition was disposed of and the matter was remitted to the Board
for reconsideration. On reconsideration also the Board disapproved
the proposal of termination of services of the petitioner vide order
dated 30.7.2009. This order was again challenged by the
Committee of Management by filing Civil Misc. Writ Petition
No.59872 of 2009 (Committee of Management, Rashtriya
Sarvajanik Inter College Vs. U.P. Secondary Education Service
Selection Board and others). While entertaining said writ petition,
an interim order has been passed on 10.11.2009 to the effect that it
will be open for the Committee of Management to take work or
not from the petitioner. In pursuance thereof the Committee of
Management is not taking work from the petitioner.
The petitioner has filed the present writ petition for issuance of a
writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the District Inspector
of Schools, Kanpur Dehat to pay salary as L.T. Grade teacher as
also the arrears.
The argument of learned counsel for the petitioner is that till date
there is no formal order terminating the services of the petitioner
and the proposal to terminate the services of the petitioner stands
disapproved by the Board. Therefore, the petitioner continues to be
in service as Assistant Teacher and is entitled to salary. He has
further submitted that irrespective of the fact that the order of
disapproval passed by the Board is pending consideration before
this Court, it cannot be said that the petitioner is out of job and is
not entitled to salary. It is also submitted that even if the
Committee of Management is not taking work from the petitioner
that cannot be a ground for non payment of salary to him.
The petitioner in this connection has submitted various
representations to the District Inspector of Schools, last being
dated 2.12.2009 (Annexure – 4 to the writ petition) but the same
remain unattended.
In view of aforesaid facts and circumstances, as admittedly the
petitioner continues to be an Assistant Teacher in the institution
concerned and apparently there is no order directing to stop
payment of salary to him, the writ petition is finally disposed of
with liberty to the petitioner to make a fresh representation
ventilating his grievance with regard to non-payment of salary
before respondent no.2, District Inspector of Schools along with
the certified copy of this order within two weeks from today.
Needless to say that in case such a representation is made within
the time stipulated, the respondent no.3 shall consider and decide
the same by a speaking order in accordance with law, without
being influenced by any observation made herein above, as
expeditiously as possible, preferably within two months from the
date of submission of the representation and ensure that the
payment is made as per the order passed.
Petition disposed of as above.
Order Date :- 18.1.2010
BK