High Court
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:101142 Court No. - 34 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17670 of 2018 Petitioner :- Shyama Nand Mishra Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ved Byas Mishra,Rajesh Kumar Maddheshiya Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Rajesh Kumar Maddheshiya,Shyam Krishna Gupta Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J. Heard Shri Ved Byas Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel appearing for State- respondents and Shri Akhilesh Kumar Singh, learned Advocate, who has put in appearance on behalf of respondent No.5. Petitioner, before this Court claimed to have been validly appointed with the approval of the then District Basic Education Officer under its order dated 10th May, 1999. He was issued with an appointment order and submitted his joining and continued to work in the Junior High School as Assistant Teacher. When the institution was barred on grant- in-aid in the year 2018, the Regional Level Committee constituted for the purpose of determination of strength of the teachers as per the norms prescribed for Junior High School and, accordingly, to evaluate and appreciate the documents relating to the employees working in the institution referred to a report submitted by District Basic Education Officer in which Pratap Narain Singh was reported to be working as Head Master followed by Rajesh Kumar Singh, Satish Kumar Singh, Ashok Kumar Pandey, Ajay Kumar Singh, Shyamanand Mishra and Ram Dayal Tiwari in the order of appointment working as Assistant Teachers and further followed by Clerk and Class-IV employees, namely, the peon. Since as per the norms, the Committee was to approve one Head Master and four Assistant Teachers out of the total working faculty in the institution, the Committee approved approved the Head Master, namely, Pratap Narain Singh then Assistant Teachers Ashok Kumar Pandey, Rajesh Kumar Singh, Satish Kumar Singh and Ajay Kumar Singh, respectively, and also a peon Prem Chanda Sharma. However, in its further deliberation, it recorded as it had detected that the alleged approval order in respect of Assistant Teacher Ajay Kumar Singh did not find any mention in the despatch register of the District Basic Education Officer dated 9th February, 1999 and, therefore, proposal in respect of Ajay Kumar Singh could not made. So in the final list approved by the Regional Level Committee for the purposes of payment of
Legal Reasoning
salary Shri Pratap Narain Singh-Head Master, Ashok Kumar Pandey-Assistant Teacher, Rajesh Kumar Singh-Assistant Teacher, Satish Kumar Singh-Assistant Teacher and Prem Chand Sharma as Peon came to be mentioned by by the Regional Level Committee. An argument advanced for assailing the order/resolution of the Regional Level Committee dated 25th January, 2018, was that as per the norms prescribed by the State Government, the minimum strength to be sanctioned was to be one Head Master and four Assistant Teachers and the petitioner's papers since were referred to in the report of District Basic Education Officer and were not found to be doubtful at all, he being next to Ajay Kumar Singh, whose credentials had been doubted, he ought to have been included in the list of approved teachers and yet the Committee failed to accord any consideration to the candidature of the petitioner. It was submitted that the Committee did not hold the petitioner's appointment and approval to be bad, but only did not consider for the reason that norms prescribed only for one Head Master and four Assistant Teachers. He submitted that since Ajay Kumar Singh's candidature had come to be rejected, the petitioner being the next man should have been brought in by the Committee as it would have kept the norm intact and, therefore, non consideration of petitioner's claim for the purposes of approval vitiated the entire decision of the Regional Level Committee. He had submitted that miscarriage of justice would result in the event that gross-error committed by the Regional Level Committee was not arrested. Considering the aforesaid arguments, the original records were directed to be placed before the Court relating to the selection and appointment of the petitioner from the office of District Basic Education Officer, Deoria, the Manager of the Committee of Management was also directed to produce the second copy which the management has in such matters. Learned Standing Counsel has placed the original records relating to the selection and appointment of the petitioner. From the original records, it clearly transpires that the District Basic Education Officer proceeded to grant permission under its letter dated 3rd December, 1998 to the Manager of the institution to hold selection on the vacant posts of Assistant Teacher caused by resignation of one Shafi Mohd. Ansari. It is worth noticing and referable here also the report of the Assistant Basic Education Officer dated 9.11.1998 had recommended for approval of the resignation of Mohd. Shafi Ahmad and this document is available on record. In compliance of the above permission granted, the management proceeded to advertise the vacancy in two Newspapers, namely, Aaj and Seema Rekha. After the publications were made, the District Basic Education Officer was asked on 8.12.1998 by the management to appoint an observer to the Selection Committee and in turn, the District Basic Education Officer on 11th December, 1998, nominated Assistant Basic Education Officer, Lar, to the Selection Committee. The selection was held and the entire papers stood forwarded to the District Basic Education Officer for necessary approval vide covering letter dated 18.4.1999 by the Manager for approval and so also the report was submitted by the District Basic Education Officer on 18.4.1999 approving the selection made of the present petitioner. The District Basic Education Officer, accordingly, granted approval to the selection under its order dated 10th May, 1999. All these copies are in original form placed before this Court by learned Standing Counsel. The Manager has also produced carbon copy of these papers and they match with each other. So, there can be no scope of doubt regarding the papers filed before the District Basic Education Officer by the then Manager of the institution. In such circumstances, therefore, it can safely be concluded that the petitioner was lawfully selected and appointed as Assistant Teacher in the institution in question and was working at the time when the institution was brought on grant- in-aid. A report of the District Basic Education Officer in which the petitioner has been found to be working with the approval of the District Basic Education Officer has been referred to and considered by the Regional Committee. It is unfortunate only that the Committee while rejecting the candidature of Ajay Kumar Singh did not deliberate upon the candidature of the next man, namely, the petitioner and institution has unnecessarily been given financial approval in respect of only one Head Master and three Assistant Teachers leaving one post vacant despite there being available candidate working in the institution. However, I find that there no useful purpose would be served by setting aside the resolution of the Regional Level Committee because it only approves one Head Master and three Assistant Teachers and does not disapprove the candidature of the petitioner. Accordingly, I direct the Regional Level Committee to reconsider the claim of the petitioner in the light of the observations made. The original records are returned to the Standing Counsel and the Regional Level Committee shall peruse the same and the documents, which have come to be referred in this order. Regional Level Committee will accord financial approval to the petitioner also as Assistant Teacher in the institution. It is made clear that for no technical reason the claim of the petitioner would be rejected and in the event Regional Level Committee finds its decision dated 25th January, 2018, coming in its way in considering the candidature of the petitioner for approval, the said order shall be taken to have been set aside to that extent and will not be having any bearing upon the merit of the claim of the petitioner. An appropriate decision shall be taken by the Regional Level Committee in the next 60 days' time. Needless to add an opportunity of hearing will be accorded to both to petitioner as well as the Committee of Management of the institution. The order to be passed by the Regional Level Committee shall be reasoned and speaking order. With the aforesaid observations/directions, this petition stands
Decision
disposed off. Order Date :- 10.5.2023 LN Tripathi Digitally signed by :- LALIT TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad