High Court
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:85267 Court No. - 38 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 65443 of 2008 Petitioner :- Lokesh Kumar Sharma And Others Respondent :- State of U.P. and Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Radha Kant Ojha,G.Pratap Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gajendra Pratap,H.N. Pandey,K. Shailendra,Komal Mehrotra,Krishna Ji Khare,S.C. Tripathi,S.K.S.Kushwaha,Yatindra with Case :- WRIT - A No. - 18710 of 2022 Petitioner :- Dharmendra Kumar Chaudhary And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Kavish Suhail,Raj Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Shiv Murti Singh Hon'ble Donadi Ramesh,J.
Legal Reasoning
1. Heard Sri R.K. Ojha, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioners and Sri Gajendra Pratap, learned counsel for respondent nos. 7 to 9. 2. Present writ petition is filed questioning the order dated 3.10.2008 passed by respondent no. 3-District Inspector of Schools, Allahabad, by which the third respondent has approved the selection of respondent nos. 7 to 9. 3. The petitioners, who were participated in the selection process pursuant to the notification dated 8.6.2008, but on the superannuation of the then Principal and on interference of new ad hoc Principal, selections were subsequently made and the said selections were approved by the third respondent vide impugned order dated 3.10.2008 and to support the said selections, no records are forthcoming and no interviews were held only some kith and kin were selected and appointed. 4. Considering the submissions made and based on the materials placed on record, this Court has passed the following interim order on 17.12.2008: "Learned Standing Counsel has accepted notice on behalf of the respondent nos. 1 to 4. Issue notice to respondent no.5,6,7,8 and 9. Each one of the respondents is granted six weeks time to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit may be filed within two weeks thereafter. List after eight weeks. It has been contended on behalf of petitioners that entire selection proceedings are nothing but farce proceedings and the fact of the matter is that earlier officiating Principal Surendra Nath Rai had been superannuated from the post on 15.6.2008, next incumbent namely Radhey Shyam Pandey was officiating as Principal, who has cancelled any selection process. Petitioner has also contended that without undertaking process of selection persons have been selected who are relatives of officials of the office of District Inspector of Schools namely Mahendra Chaudhari son of Jeet Lal Chaudhary is nephew of Mr. LalJi Chaudhari, who is Chief Accountant in the office of the District Inspector of Schools and another persons are also candidates of another employees of the office of the District Inspector of Schools. Petitioners submit that all these serious matters requires consideration by this court, as appointment proceedings are out come of manipulation. Consequently, till the next date of listing, operation of the order dated 3.10.2008 passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Allahabad shall be kept in abeyance. On the next date fixed, relevant record be produced." 5. After that, the selected candidates i.e. respondent nos. 7 to 9 have filed their counter affidavit along with stay vacation application. During pendency of the said stay vacation application,
Decision
the writ petition was dismissed for non-prosecution on 16.12.2019 and subsequently, the said writ petition was restored back to its original number vide order dated 15.12.2022. 6. Consequent upon the same, the respondent nos. 7 to 9, who were selected in the selection process, have approached this Court by filing Writ A No. 18710 of 2022 with a prayer to disburse the salaries regularly by month to month. The said writ petition was tagged along with the present writ petition. 7. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in connected Writ A No. 18710 of 2022 has submitted that the petitioners in Writ A No. 65443 of 2008 and Writ A No. 18710 of 2022 have participated in the selection process. The advertisement issued by the committee of management on 8.6.2008 and the then Principal was superannuated on 15.6.2008. The senior most teacher, who was appointed as ad hoc Principal has suspended the selection process but subsequently, the other Principal has completed and forwarded the select list to the competent authority and based on the record, he approved the selection of the petitioners vide order dated 3.10.2008. Though the said orders were kept in abeyance by this Court vide order dated 7.12.2008, but the stay order was not extended after 6.12.2019. After that, the said writ petition was dismissed for non-prosecution on 16.12.2019. Though, they are working from 3.12.2008, but they have not been released salaries. Hence, the petitioners have approached this Court by filing Writ A No. 18710 of 2022. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioners has further submitted that the selection process was initiated by the then principal and selections were made according to the procedure and the said selection was also approved by the competent authority. Only by virtue of the interim directions dated 17.12.2008, they were not granted salaries but subsequent to the dismissal of the writ petition, they have again represented for salaries. 9. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners in Writ A No. 65443 of 2008 has contended that immediately after selection process, they have approached this Court and this Court after considering material has passed the order on 17.12.2008 keeping the selection in abeyance. Hence, the contentions of learned counsel for the petitioners in Writ A No. 18710 of 2022 are baseless and without any support. He further submitted that in the identical situation, the Government has issued an order on 19th December, 2020 by constituting a committee to inquire into such situation and to take appropriate decision. Hence, he requested to remand the matter to the said committee and after inquiry, the committee may take appropriate decision. 10. Learned counsel for the petitioner appearing in Writ A No. 18710 of 2022 has conceded to the said request but he has stressed his submissions that the petitioners in Writ A No. 18710 of 2022 were joined and continuing in the institution. 11. In these circumstances, considering the statement made by learned counsel for the petitioners, both the writ petitions stands disposed of by remitting back to the committee constituted by order dated 19th December, 2020 to consider the request made by the petitioners in Writ A No. 65443 of 2008 and after making an inquiry by providing notice to all the persons including respondent nos. 7 to 9 in the present writ petition and after getting the entire record from the management and thorough inquiry, the authorities may take appropriate decision. It is needless to say if the petitioners in Writ A No. 18710 of 2022, if they were joined and continuing, the respondents are directed to release salaries as they were allowed to continue till passing of the final orders. The said exercise shall be completed within a period of four months from today. Order Date :- 20.5.2025 Noman (Donadi Ramesh, J.) Digitally signed by :- NOMAN AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad