Allahabad High Court
Raman Singh vs The District Inspector Of Schools ... on 26 October, 2017
Bench: Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, Saral Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 37
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 1873 of 2013
Appellant :- Raman Singh
Respondent :- The District Inspector Of Schools And 2 Others
Counsel for Appellant :- Gopal Misra
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Amreshwar Pratap Sahi,J.
Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.
Heard Sri Vishesh Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant.
This appeal questions the correctness of the judgment of the learned Single Judge, whereby the writ petition filed by the appellant has been dismissed holding that the appellant's appointment had been made against a leave vacancy, that was admittedly converted into a permanent vacancy on account of death of the incumbent, and therefore, in the absence of the procedure provided for under the U.P. Secondary Education Services Commission (Removal of Difficulties) (Second) Order, 1981, the claim of the appellant cannot be accepted. Thus, the learned Single Judge, came to the conclusion that the very claim of the appointment of the appellant being not in accordance with law, he cannot be permitted to continue merely because there was an interim order in the writ petition on 16.04.1996.
We have perused the record of the writ petition and the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State and from that we find that neither the ad-hoc appointment on leave vacancy or after its conversion into a substantive vacancy was financially approved by the District Inspector of Schools. To the contrary, the District Inspector of Schools on 14th July, 1994 sent a communication to the Manager that in view of the post having become substantively vacant and the permanent vacancy existing, the proposal of the management to appoint the appellant is not in accordance with law and therefore, the papers are being returned back.
The appellant appears to have filed Writ Petition No. 13568 of 1996 giving rise to the present appeal without disclosing the aforesaid communication dated 14th July, 1994 and without even raising any challenge to the same. It appears that an interim order was passed on 16.04.1996 to permit the petitioner/appellant to continue till the regularly selected candidate from the Commission joins. The then Deputy Director of Education on 30th June 1997 passed an order to allow the appellant to continue till a regularly selected candidates from the Commission joins, inasmuch as, the candidate who had been selected for the post in question namely Sri Raman Singh had been unable to join the Institution.
The writ petition came to be dismissed by the learned Single Judge on 9th October, 2013, whereafter the present appeal was filed and an interim order has been passed by a Division Bench on 06.12.2013 extending the benefit of the interim order dated 16.04.1996 to the appellant on the ground that no one has been able to join on the post in question after being selected from the Commission.
In view of the aforesaid back ground, learned counsel for the appellant may assist the Court as to in what manner and under what law can this Court extend the benefit of continuance any further to the appellant in the back ground aforesaid. Sri Vishesh Kumar prays that the matter be taken up on Monday.
Put up on 30th October, 2017.
Order Date :- 26.10.2017
Ishan
