Allahabad High Court
Ramendra Pal Singh vs State Of U.P. And Others on 3 May, 2012
Bench: B. Amit Sthalekar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?AFR
Court No. - 28
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 2144 of 2006
Petitioner :- Ramendra Pal Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others
Petitioner Counsel :- Vinod Kumar Singh,S.K. Singh
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,P.C. Jain,Sanjay Kumar Mishra
Hon'ble B. Amit Sthalekar,J.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 30.12.2005 passed by the respondent no.2, the District Inspector of Schools, Hathras, by which the order dated 10.3.2005 promoting the petitioner from class IV to class III, post of clerk, has been declared to be non-effective thus resulting in the cancellation of promotion of the petitioner.
The facts of the case, in brief, are that the petitioner was appointed as a class IV employee in the institution namely Adarsh Inter College, Mau, District Hathras which is an aided and recognized educational institution, and governed by the provisions of U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 and regulations framed thereunder. The appointment of the petitioner was approved by the District Inspector of Schools w.e.f. 1.2.1992 and since then the petitioner was working on the post of Daftari till the date of his promotion in the class III post.
The case of the petitioner further is that three posts of clerk including the post of Head Clerk was sanctioned in the institution. According to him, this post was required to be filled by promotion in terms of Chapter III Regulation 2 Clause 2 of the Regulations framed under the Intermediate Education Act, 1951.
One Natha Ram Agnihotri stated to have retired from service in June, 2002 and against the said post one Rajendra Singh Chhonkar was promoted on the post of Head Clerk. Due to promotion of Rajendra Singh Chhonkar post of Assistant Clerk fell vacant and, therefore, steps were initiated for making promotion to the said post to the extent of 50%. The post in question fell vacant on 30.6.2002.
By a resolution of the Committee of Management dated 3.12.2004 the petitioner was promoted to the class III post. This promotion was also approved by the District Inspector of Schools, Hathras now (Mahamaya Nagar) on 10.3.2005. Since then the petitioner is continuing to discharge his duties on the post of Assistant Clerk.
In the impugned order the reason given for cancelling the promotion of the petitioner is that the minimum qualification for promotion of a candidate from class IV to class III is 'intermediate pass ' whereas the petitioner was only high school pass. On the basis of a G.O. No.5077 [15-6-3040]/1975 dated 9.9.1975 the petitioner was not entitled for promotion as he was only High School pass. Thereafter, another G.O. was issued on 2.12.1975, which is filed as Annexure-6 to the writ petition wherein also the minimum qualification for a candidate for promotion from class IV to class III is stated to be 'intermediate'.
I have heard Sri Vinod Kumar Singh appearing for the petitioner, Sri P.C. Jain appearing for respondent no.5, Sri Jaiveer Singh. The order is being dictated in open Court.
The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that he was duly promoted to the post of clerk through resolution of the Committee of Management dated 3.12.2004 and his promotion was also approved by the District Inspector of Schools on 10.3.2005 and therefore, his promotion could not be faulted inasmuch as all the facts were already before the Committee of Management as well as the District Inspector of Schools. So far as the G.O. dated 9.9.1975 ( the same has not been filed by either of the parties) and the G.O. dated 2.12.1975 are concerned, he submits that these G.Os. were erroneous and contrary to the provisions of Chapter III Regulation 2 (1) of the Regulations which provide that the minimum educational eligibility qualification for a candidate for promotion from class IV to class III will be the same as that applicable to educational institutions maintained and managed by the Government. Learned counsel in the same context refers to G.O. dated 31.5.1981 filed as Annexure-7 to the writ petition which also refers to the provisions of Chapter III, Rule 2 (1) of the Regulations and states that some confusion appears to be created. In some of the institutions the minimum eligibility qualification for promotion from class IV to class III is 'intermediate' whereas it should be 'high school' i.e. same as those applicable to educational institutions maintained and managed by the Government.
According to learned counsel, from a reading of the G.O. dated 31.5.1981 in the context of Chapter III Rule 2 (1) of the Regulations there would be no doubt that the minimum educational eligibility qualification for promotion of a candidate from class IV to class III even an aided and recognized institution would be high school.
I have gone through the provision of Chapter III Rule 2 (1) of the Regulations. From a reading of the said provisions, there is no doubt that the minimum educational qualification for promotion from class IV to class III will be the same as that applicable to institutions maintained and managed by the Government. Further G.O. dated 31.5.1981 only reiterates and restates what the regulations already provided in clear and unambiguous terms. According to G.O. dated 31.5.1981, the minimum educational qualification for a candidate for promotion from class IV to class III would be 'High School' as that is applicable in Intermediate Educational Institutions maintained and managed by the Government and not 'Intermediate'. In fact the G.O. of 1981 goes to show that by insisting on intermediate as the minimum educational qualification for promotion from class -IV to class III, an illusion is being created, which is contrary to the provisions of Chapter III Rule 2(1) of the Regulations.
Sri P. C. Jain has sought to justify the impugned order dated 30.12.2005 by stating that the minimum educational qualification for promotion from class IV to class III is Intermediate and since the petitioner is only a high school, he was not eligible for promotion even though in the list of seniority he may have been the senior most class IV employee.
However, in view of the above discussions and the provisions of Chapter III Rule 2 (1) of the Regulations as further reiterated and restated by the G.O. dated 31.5.1981, there is no doubt that the minimum eligibility qualification for promotion from class-IV to class-III is high school and not intermediate. In the circumstances, the impugned order dated 30.12.2005 deserves to be quashed and is accordingly quashed. At the time of admission this Court vide its order dated 12.1.2006 had been pleased to stay the operation of the order dated 30.12.2005 and had further directed that the petitioner shall be allowed to discharge his duties as a class III employee in the institution and receive the salary. In view of the same, no further directions are required.
The writ petition stands allowed.
There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 3.5.2012
Asha
