Others v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin

2. Heard Shri Shobhit Mohan Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri D. C. Pathak, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the respondents no. 1 to 4 and Shri Pratyush Mishra, learned counsel for the respondent no. 5.

3. Although voluminous pleadings are there on record yet the matter revolves in a very narrow compass.

4. The Committee of Management, Secretary as well as the Principal of the Institution are before this Court aggrieved by the orders dated 28.3.2025, 5.3.2025, 21.3.2025 and 3.6.2024, a copy of which is annexures 1 to 4 to the writ petition.

5. Vide order dated 3.6.2024, a copy of which is annexure 4 to the writ petition, as passed by Joint Director (Education) it has been indicated that no efforts have been made by the petitioner no. 3 Principal for admission of students in the trade of Food and Fruit Preservation and thus directions have been issued to the petitioner Principal that he should make personal efforts for the purpose of admission of students in the said trade and to take work from the respondent no. 5 as Guest Lecturer in the said trade.

6. Vide order dated 5.3.2025, a copy of which is annexure 2 to the 2 WRIA No. 4906 of 2025 writ petition, the Joint Director (Education) has required the District Inspector of Schools to take action and the same has been reiterated vide order dated 21.3.2025, a copy of which is annexure 3 to the writ petition.

7. Vide order dated 28.3.2025, a copy of which is annexure 1 to the writ petition, the District Inspector of Schools has required the petitioner no. 1 Manager of the institution to take disciplinary action against the petitioner no. 3 Principal and to ensure payment of honorarium to the respondent no. 5. The order impugned also directs that the Guest Lecturer i.e. respondent no. 5 should sign on the attendance register.

8. Admittedly, the academic session starts in the month of April. As also emerges from perusal of order impugned dated 28.3.2025. admittedly no students could be admitted in the said trade in the institution despite a three member committee having been formed vide order dated 21.4.2025, a copy of which is annexure 13 to the writ petition, under the directions issued by District Inspector of Schools. Perusal of the said order would indicate that three member committee was required to stand on the gate of the institution and to give sufficient publicity of the said trade available in the institution and to ensure that the students are admitted in that particular trade in the institution.

9. Admittedly, despite the aforesaid efforts made by three member committee, it emerges from perusal of paragraph 21 of the counter affidavit filed by the respondent no. 4 that students could not be admitted in the said trade on account of lack of cooperation of the Principal of the institution. However the official respondents have not annexed the copy of the report that may have been submitted by three member committee and also, it does also stand to reason, as to the impediment that may have been put by the Principal more particularly when the three member committee was required to stand at the gate of the institution and to publicize the said trade.

10. Be that as it may the fact of the matter remains that there are no students in the trade in the institution. Obviously no admissions 3 WRIA No. 4906 of 2025 can be made mid session as also stands admitted by Shri D. C. Pathak, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State as the session starts in the month of April.

11. Earlier, service of respondent no. 5 as Guest Lecturer in the said trade had been terminated vide order dated 29.6.2022. Upon a writ petition having been filed raising a challenge to the said termination order and the writ court having sought instructions in Writ A No. 7544 of 2022 vide order dated 15.11.2022, the Joint Director (Education) vide order dated 29.11.2022, a copy of which is annexure 7 to the counter affidavit filed by the respondent no. 5, has himself made the order of termination dated 29.6.2022 as void ab initio.

12. It is contended that natural corollary to the termination order dated 29.6.2022 having been made void ab initio vide order dated

29.11.2022 would be that the respondent no. 5 still continues in service which is also apparent from the order impugned dated

28.3.2025 which indicates that the respondent no. 5 be permitted to join, sign the attendance register and to be paid honorarium. However the same is refuted by learned Standing Counsel by contending that the initial appointment was for a period of 10 months and although the petitioners cannot terminate the service of a Guest Lecturer, yet there is provision of automatic renewal after 10 months. It is also stated that a Guest Lecturer would only be entitled for payment when he signs the attendance register for the trade/subject for which he has been appointed to teach.

13. Keeping in view aforesaid discussion more particularly when there are no students in the trade of Food and Fruit Preservation in the institution and the admission process, which was initiated in the month of April 2025 has also not succeeded in getting any student in that particular trade consequently there does not appear to be any occasion for the orders impugned dated 3.6.2024 as well as the order dated 28.3.2025 so far as it directs for disciplinary action against the Principal to continue. Consequently, the orders dated

3.6.2024 and 28.3.2025 are set aside to the aforesaid extent. 4 WRIA No. 4906 of 2025

14. So far as the the payment of honorarium to respondent no. 5 is concerned, let the matter pertaining to honorarium as payable to respondent no. 5 be considered in the aforesaid peculiar situation of Guest Lecturer to be only paid in case there are some students on roll and he signs the attendance register and the fact of matter is that there are no students in the institution. Let Joint Director (Education) examine the situation pertaining to payment of honorarium in the light of the order dated 29.11.2022 passed by the Joint Director (Education) wherein the termination order of the respondent no. 5 has been made void ab initio.

15. Let such matter be examined with respect to respondent no. 5 by the Joint Director (Education) within four weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order keeping in view observations made above.

16. The writ petition is disposed of. September 10, 2025 J. K. Dinkar (Abdul Moin,J.) JESHU KUMAR DINKAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

2. Heard Shri Shobhit Mohan Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri D. C. Pathak, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the respondents no. 1 to 4 and Shri Pratyush Mishra, learned counsel for the respondent no. 5.

3. Although voluminous pleadings are there on record yet the matter revolves in a very narrow compass.

4. The Committee of Management, Secretary as well as the Principal of the Institution are before this Court aggrieved by the orders dated 28.3.2025, 5.3.2025, 21.3.2025 and 3.6.2024, a copy of which is annexures 1 to 4 to the writ petition.

5. Vide order dated 3.6.2024, a copy of which is annexure 4 to the writ petition, as passed by Joint Director (Education) it has been indicated that no efforts have been made by the petitioner no. 3 Principal for admission of students in the trade of Food and Fruit Preservation and thus directions have been issued to the petitioner Principal that he should make personal efforts for the purpose of admission of students in the said trade and to take work from the respondent no. 5 as Guest Lecturer in the said trade.

6. Vide order dated 5.3.2025, a copy of which is annexure 2 to the 2 WRIA No. 4906 of 2025 writ petition, the Joint Director (Education) has required the District Inspector of Schools to take action and the same has been reiterated vide order dated 21.3.2025, a copy of which is annexure 3 to the writ petition.

7. Vide order dated 28.3.2025, a copy of which is annexure 1 to the writ petition, the District Inspector of Schools has required the petitioner no. 1 Manager of the institution to take disciplinary action against the petitioner no. 3 Principal and to ensure payment of honorarium to the respondent no. 5. The order impugned also directs that the Guest Lecturer i.e. respondent no. 5 should sign on the attendance register.

8. Admittedly, the academic session starts in the month of April. As also emerges from perusal of order impugned dated 28.3.2025. admittedly no students could be admitted in the said trade in the institution despite a three member committee having been formed vide order dated 21.4.2025, a copy of which is annexure 13 to the writ petition, under the directions issued by District Inspector of Schools. Perusal of the said order would indicate that three member committee was required to stand on the gate of the institution and to give sufficient publicity of the said trade available in the institution and to ensure that the students are admitted in that particular trade in the institution.

9. Admittedly, despite the aforesaid efforts made by three member committee, it emerges from perusal of paragraph 21 of the counter affidavit filed by the respondent no. 4 that students could not be admitted in the said trade on account of lack of cooperation of the Principal of the institution. However the official respondents have not annexed the copy of the report that may have been submitted by three member committee and also, it does also stand to reason, as to the impediment that may have been put by the Principal more particularly when the three member committee was required to stand at the gate of the institution and to publicize the said trade.

10. Be that as it may the fact of the matter remains that there are no students in the trade in the institution. Obviously no admissions 3 WRIA No. 4906 of 2025 can be made mid session as also stands admitted by Shri D. C. Pathak, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State as the session starts in the month of April.

11. Earlier, service of respondent no. 5 as Guest Lecturer in the said trade had been terminated vide order dated 29.6.2022. Upon a writ petition having been filed raising a challenge to the said termination order and the writ court having sought instructions in Writ A No. 7544 of 2022 vide order dated 15.11.2022, the Joint Director (Education) vide order dated 29.11.2022, a copy of which is annexure 7 to the counter affidavit filed by the respondent no. 5, has himself made the order of termination dated 29.6.2022 as void ab initio.

12. It is contended that natural corollary to the termination order dated 29.6.2022 having been made void ab initio vide order dated

29.11.2022 would be that the respondent no. 5 still continues in service which is also apparent from the order impugned dated

28.3.2025 which indicates that the respondent no. 5 be permitted to join, sign the attendance register and to be paid honorarium. However the same is refuted by learned Standing Counsel by contending that the initial appointment was for a period of 10 months and although the petitioners cannot terminate the service of a Guest Lecturer, yet there is provision of automatic renewal after 10 months. It is also stated that a Guest Lecturer would only be entitled for payment when he signs the attendance register for the trade/subject for which he has been appointed to teach.

13. Keeping in view aforesaid discussion more particularly when there are no students in the trade of Food and Fruit Preservation in the institution and the admission process, which was initiated in the month of April 2025 has also not succeeded in getting any student in that particular trade consequently there does not appear to be any occasion for the orders impugned dated 3.6.2024 as well as the order dated 28.3.2025 so far as it directs for disciplinary action against the Principal to continue. Consequently, the orders dated

3.6.2024 and 28.3.2025 are set aside to the aforesaid extent. 4 WRIA No. 4906 of 2025

14. So far as the the payment of honorarium to respondent no. 5 is concerned, let the matter pertaining to honorarium as payable to respondent no. 5 be considered in the aforesaid peculiar situation of Guest Lecturer to be only paid in case there are some students on roll and he signs the attendance register and the fact of matter is that there are no students in the institution. Let Joint Director (Education) examine the situation pertaining to payment of honorarium in the light of the order dated 29.11.2022 passed by the Joint Director (Education) wherein the termination order of the respondent no. 5 has been made void ab initio.

15. Let such matter be examined with respect to respondent no. 5 by the Joint Director (Education) within four weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order keeping in view observations made above.

16. The writ petition is disposed of. September 10, 2025 J. K. Dinkar (Abdul Moin,J.) JESHU KUMAR DINKAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench