Ghanshyam Singh vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 18883 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:147609
 
Court No. - 35
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11687 of 2023
 

 
Petitioner :- Ghanshyam Singh
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Kushmondeya Shahi,Tanuj Shahi
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.

Heard Sri Kushmondeya Shahi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Atul Khaneja, the State Law Officer, who appears for Respondents 1 to 3.

In view of the order, which is being proposed to be passed today, notices are not being issued to the fourth respondent.

The case of the writ petitioner is that the fourth respondent, Bahar Singh Srinet Inter College Indupur, District Deoria is a recognized Intermediate institution under the provisions of U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 and the provisions of the Act no.4 of 1982 and the U.P. Act No.24 of 1971 are applicable. It is further the case of the writ petitioner that he was appointed as LT Grade Teacher, pursuant to the approval of the third respondent, District Inspector of Schools, Deoria dated 15.07.1993 and he was continuously discharging the duties on the said post. As per the writ petitioner, the post of Lecturer (Commerce) fell vacant due to the superannuation of Sri Brij Bihari Rao on 30.06.2000, consequently, the fourth respondent passed a resolution on 23.08.2000 for the promotion of the petitioner on the said post by forwarding the papers to the third respondent, District Inspector of Schools, Deoria for further being transmitted to the Regional Committee by virtue of the letter dated 14.08.2000. In paragraph-6 of the writ petition, it is further asserted that the services of the petitioner as L.T. Grade teacher was regularized by order dated 10.06.2003 under the provisions of Section 33-B of U.P. Act No. 5 of 1982, whereas the service condition of one Sri Vishwanath Singh, who was also appointed along with the petitioner was regularized on 26.02.2001. In paragraph-7 of the writ petition, further averments have been made that from the office of the second respondent, Joint Director of Education, Gorakhpur Region, Gorakhpur certain objections were raised by letter dated 22.12.2000 with regard to the regularization of the services of the petitioner. As per the writ petitioner, the management of the fourth respondent-institution forwarded the relevant papers on 16.09.2003. In paragraph-8 of the writ petition, it is further asserted that on 23.08.2000, a resolution was passed by the fourth respondent, Committee of Management wherein along with the petitioner one Sri Vishwanath Singh was promoted on the post of Lecturer and the promotion of Sri Vishwanath Singh was approved by the second respondent, Joint Director of Education, Gorakhpur Region, Gorakhpur, on 07.02.2002, whereas the claim of the writ petitioner was being deferred in view of the fact that the services of the writ petitioner were not regularized. In paragraph-9, a statement has been made that the claim of the writ petitioner for promotion was considered by the second respondent, Regional Committee on 27.12.2010 and the petitioner's claim for promotion was approved on the post of Lecturer (Commerce) on 30.06.2000 and in compliance of the order dated 27.12.2010 the District Inspector of Schools has also granted the financial approval by order dated 18.01.2011. In paragraph-10, it has been further averred that from the date of the promotion, i.e. 23.08.2000, the petitioner is working as Lecturer (Commerce). The writ petitioner further in view of the averments contained in paragraph-11 of the writ petition has made a statement of fact that a Government Order was issued on 20.07.2001 and the petitioner was granted Selection Grade of LT Grade by order dated 16.08.2003 and after completing 10 years of service, the writ petitioner was entitled for selection grade of the post of Lecturer. In paragraph-12, it has been averred that however, considering the selection grade for the post of LT Grade Teacher and pay scale of Lecturer grade, the third respondent, District Inspector of Schools, Deoria has passed an order dated 28.01.2021 for fixation of salary of the petitioner in the selection grade w.e.f. 27.12.2020, but in fact the petitioner was entitled for the selection grade w.e.f. 16.08.2013. Though in paragraph-13 of the writ petition, the petitioner submits that he had preferred objections/ representations before the second respondent and third respondent on 16.03.2021, 21.07.2022 and 18.01.2023, but nothing has been done in that regard. Learned counsel for the writ petitioner has further invited the attention of the Court towards page-34 of the paper-book so as to further contend that in view of the communication of the third respondent, District Inspector of Schools, Deoria, marked to the fourth respondent, Committee of Management, the writ petitioner has been made admissible for selection grade w.e.f. 15.07.2003 in the pay-scale of Rs.6500-10500 referable to the LT Grade, however, in the wake of the Government Order/ Circular dated 20.07.2001, a copy whereof is at page-47, relevant extract at page-48 of the paper-book, the LT Grade teacher getting selection grade are admissible to post revision on 01.07.2001, to the pay scale of Rs.6500-200-10500, however in so far as the Lecturer is concerned in a column just below the LT Grade teacher, the selection grade is Rs.6500-200-10500, thus according to the writ petitioner, he was already getting the selection grade, which was commensurate to be enhancement of the Lecturer itself, when he was posted as LT Grade teacher and thus according to him, his claim needs to be considered for fixation of selection grade.

Reliance has been placed upon the judgment in the case of Firangi Prasad Vs. State of U.P. and others, reported in 2010(10) ADJ 659 so as to buttress the submission that on account of the fault, lethargy and apathy of the Committee of Management and the institution, the claim of the writ petitioner cannot be denied the fruits, which even otherwise, he is entitled to.

Prayer in the present petition is for quashing the order dated 28.01.2021 passed by the third respondent, District Inspector of Schools, Deoria and to fix the salary of the petitioner in the selection grade of Lecturer (Commerce), after completion of 10 years of service w.e.f. 16.08.2013.

Countering the said submission, Sri Atul Khaneja, learned Brief Holder has submitted that the issues, which the writ petitioner is raising are to be first decided at the first instance of the second respondent, Joint Director of Education, Gorakhpur Region, Gorakhpur/ Chairman, Regional Committee as what is to be seen is with regard to the entitlement of the writ petitioner, applicability of the Government Order/ Circular in question as well as the determination of the financial benefits in relation to the relief sought therein and thus according to him, he does not propose to file any response to the writ petition. However, the writ petitioner as already stated in the writ petition, has approached the second respondent so he may look into the grievance of the petitioner and thereafter proceed to pass the fresh order.

To the said submission, learned counsel for the writ petitioner no objection to the same and gracefully accepts the same.

Considering the submission of the rival parties as well as the stand taken by them, the writ petition is being disposed off without seeking any response from the respondents granting liberty to the writ petitioner to approach the second respondent, Joint Director of Education, Gorakhpur Region, Gorakhpur/ Chairman, Regional Committee with a comprehensive representation accompanied with self-attested copy of the writ petition and on the receipt of the same, the second respondent shall put to notice the fourth respondent and in case, it occasions, then to summon the records and thereafter proceed to examine the entitlement of the writ petitioner while passing a reasoned and speaking order within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of the order. It is further clarified that the second respondent while proceeding to decide the claim of the writ petitioner, shall consider the following fundamental and core issues: (a) entitlement of the writ petitioner in the wake of reliance placed upon the Government Order / Circular dated 20.07.2001; (b) the verification with regard to the appointment and working of the writ petitioner; (c) the entitlement of the writ petitioner in accordance with any other Government Order; (d) any other ancillary or incidental issues connected with the same.

Needless to point out that the writ petitioner has been decided without seeking any response from the respondents and in absence of any appearance on behalf of the fourth respondent, thus passing of this order may not be construed to an expression that this Court has adjudicated the matter on merits and the second respondent shall pass an order with independent application of mind without being influenced or obsessed with any of the observations made hereinabove.

With the aforesaid observations the writ petition stands disposed off.

Order Date :- 25.7.2023

N.S.Rathour