The court quashed an order of the District Inspector of Schools denying financial approval for the petitioner's appointment. It remanded the matter for a fresh decision, listing non-production of the relevant university statute as the sole cause.
Quashment of order dated 02.01.2018 and remand to D.I.O.S., Varanasi for fresh decision within six weeks.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 32
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3139 of 2018 Petitioner :- Saurabh Mishra Respondent :- State of U.P. Counsel for Petitioner :- Mr Akhilesh Kumar Singh,Mr Hritudhwaj Pratap Sahi
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,A/S0663/2017,Gyanendra Kumar Mishra
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard Sri Sankalp Narayan, Advocate holding brief of Sri H.P. Sahu, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent nos. 1 and 2 and Sri Gyanendra Kumar Mishra, counsel for the respondent no. 3.
This writ petition has been filed praying for quashing of the order dated 02.01.2018 passed by the D.I.O.S., Varanasi and for direction to the respondents to accord financial approval for appointment to the petitioner.
The brief facts in the petition are that there is an institution, named, Ramanuj Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya Kashi, Varanasi, affiliated to Sampurnanand Sanskrit University, Varanasi and the provisions of U.P. High Schools and Intermediate Colleges (Payment of Salaries to Teachers and other Employees) Act, 1971 applies to the staff of the institution.
One post of clerk fell vacant in the institution on 30.06.2016 and the committee of management, after advertising the post in newspaper, Rashtriya Sahara constituted a selected committee and 5 persons participated in the interview held on 19.04.2017 and the committee resolved to appoint the petitioner on the aforesaid post on 20.04.2017 and submitted the document to the respondent no. 2, D.I.O.S., Varanasi for approval of selection of the petitioner on 25.04.2017. In anticipation of approval, the petitioner was issued appointment letter on 21.04.2017. He joined his post on 23.04.2017.
A counter affidavit has been filed wherein two objections have been raised against the selection of the petitioner. The first objection is regarding the non-compliance of Regulation 101 of Chapter 3 of the Intermediate Education Act and the second objection is that one, Smt. Neelam Dwivedi, wife of late, Virendra Kumar Dwivedi, was directed to be appointed in the institution of the petitioner by the respondent no. 2 but disobeying his order the selection and appointment of the petitioner was made by the committee of management of the institution.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the provision of Intermediate Education Act and the Regulations framed thereunder are not at all applicable to the institution of the petitioner which is affiliated to Sampurnanand Sanskrit University and is governed by the first statute of the University. Regarding the second argument regarding the violation of the order of D.I.O.S., Varanasi in denying appointment to Smt. Neelam Dwivedi, it has been submitted that her husband was working in some other institution and not in the institution of petitioner and therefore she had no right to be appointed in the institution.
A supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioner wherein the order of appointment of Smt. Neelam Dwivedi has been brought on record whereby she has been appointed in Kashi Gurukul Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya, Dhoopchandi, Varanasi. He has submitted that both the grounds taken in the impugned order of the respondent no. 2 are not tenable.
Learned Standing Counsel has submitted that the appointment of the petitioner was made by the selection committed without following the procedure in clandestine manner without proper advertisement and the appointment being in violation of the Regulation aforesaid cannot be approved by the District Inspector of Schools.
After considering the rival submissions, this court finds that the petitioner has not brought on record the relevant provisions of the first statute of Sampurnanand Sanskrit University. Only the relevant part of the statute regarding compassionate appointment has been brought on record and not the relevant part of the statute which relaxes the rigorous of Regulation 101 aforesaid.
In view of the above, the impugned order 02.01.2018 passed by respondent no. 2, D.I.O.S., Varanasi is hereby quashed. The matter is remanded to the D.I.O.S., Varanasi for fresh decision in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from today after hearing the parties concerned, only on the issue of applicability of Ist statute of the Sampurnanand Sanskrit University of the College of petitioner and nonapplication of Regulation 101, Chapter 3 of the Intermediate Education Act.
The writ petition stands allowed .
Order Date :- 28.4.2022 / Rohit
Digitally signed by ROHIT DAS Date: 2022.05.01 18:18:38 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner can claim financial approval for his appointment despite objections regarding statutory compliance and a prior order.
Saurabh Mishra
State of U.P.
Siddharth
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
