Court No. - 29
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 37035 of 2010
Petitioner :- Indra Pal Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others
Petitioner Counsel :- A.P. Tiwari,S.S. Tripathi
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.
Court No. 18
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 37035 of 2010.
Indra Pal Singh
Versus
State of U.P. and others.
Hon'ble Arun Tandon, J.
Petitioner before this Court claims that he was appointed as
C.T. Grade teacher under the letter of the Manager of the
institution dated 01.07.1980 in Sri Achhey Lal Smarak Inter
College, Jera Jhal, District Firozabad. It is admitted on record
that on the date of appointment the petitioner was untrained
and that the institution in question was a recognized
Intermediate College. Under Appendix ‘A’ of Chapter II of the
regulations framed under the Intermediate Education Act, no
person can be appointed as C.T. Grade teacher to impart
education in a recognized Intermediate College unless he
has a requisite training certificate to his credit. In view of the
same, this Court has no hesitation to record that on the date
the petitioner claims appointment, he was not qualified to be
appointed as C.T. Grade in a recognized Intermediate
College. It may be noticed that on the date the petitioner
claims appointment, the institution was not on the grant-in-aid
list of the State. However provisions of the Intermediate
Education Act were applicable and, therefore, appointment as
a teacher in a recognized Intermediate College could have
been made either under the provisions of the Intermediate
Education Act or under the provisions of the U.P. Secondary
Education Services Selection Board Act, 1982.
It is not the case of the petitioner that any procedure
prescribed under the Intermediate Education Act was
followed before making the appointment. This Court may
record that under the Intermediate Education Act,
appointment of teacher in a recognized Intermediate College
has to be made on a recommendation of the Selection
Committee as per the procedure under Section 16-E which
provides for Advertisement and application being invited by
the District Inspector of Schools. {Reference Section 16-
E(4) }. The constitution of the Selection Committee has been
provided for under Section 16-F which amongst other has to
comprises of 03 members nominated by the Regional Joint
Director of Education. The writ petition is completely silent
about any such procedure having been followed.
It is not the case of the petitioner that he has been appointed
on the recommendation of the Selection Board.
In view of the aforesaid this Court holds that the appointment
claimed by the petitioner is a nullity and is of no legal
consequence.
In paragraph 10 of the writ petition it is stated that the
petitioner subsequently completed his B.Ed. training and was
posted in L.T. Grade in the institution w.e.f. 01.07.2001 as the
C.T. Cadre was declared a dying cadre. The averment made
makes no sense. The existing persons working in C.T. cadre
do not get promotion in the higher L.T. cadre because C.T.
cadre is declared a dying cadre.
This Court may further record that the petitioner had filed a
Writ Petition earlier being Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 34003
of 1997 alleging therein that he has been not permitted to
work in the institution, although no order of suspension or
termination has been issued. The Writ Court on 21.10.1997
directed that the respondents will permit the petitioner to work
and pay salary on month to month basis provided no
suspension or termination order had been passed. The writ
petition was got dismissed as withdrawn on 11.11.2004.
It is stated that the petitioner was thereafter allowed to work
in the institution w.e.f. 01.01.2003. Subsequently the
institution was taken on the grant-in-aid list w.e.f. 01.01.2004.
However the name of the petitioner was not included in the
list of staff for payment of salary being released through State
exchequer, despite the order of the District Inspector of
Schools dated 11.05.2004. The petitioner, therefore, filed
another writ petition before this Court being Civil Misc. Writ
Petition No. 48379 of 2004. The said writ petition was also
dismissed, vide order dated 07.01.2010, as not pressed. This
is the third writ petition for a direction upon the District
Inspector of Schools to ensure payment of salary to the
petitioner as L.T. Grade teacher w.e.f. 01.07.2004.
I am of the considered opinion that the appointment of the
petitioner itself being de hors the statutory provisions is a
nullity in the eyes of law. He can have no claim for payment
of salary from the State exchequer. Moreover the dismissal of
two writ petitions further debars the petitioner from filing this
3rd writ petition for salary from the State exchequer.
The writ petition is dismissed.
Dated : 28.06.10
VR/37035/10