Radhey Shyam vs District Inspector of Schools, Jaunpur and others

Rakesh Tiwari, J.—Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.

This writ petition has been filed for commanding the respondents to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to make payment of salary to the petitioner from the month of March, 1988 onwards.

B.N.B. Inter College, Mariahu, District Jaunpur is a recognized institution under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 and is governed by U.P. High School and Intermediate Colleges (Payment of Salaries of Teachers and other Employees) Act, 1971.

In brief the facts are that a vacancy of peon was caused due to the promotion of one Ram Nihor Tiwari as daftari in the year 1986. The petitioner was appointed on the post of peon in the vacancy caused by Ram Nihor Tiwari. The District Inspector of Schools also granted financial approval to the appointment of the petitioner.

The petitioner is aggrieved by notice dated 5.10.1988, appended as Annexure4 to this writ petition, which has been issued by the District Inspector of Schools, Jaunpur. A perusal of the showcause notice indicates that it is in a typed proforma in which the appointment of the petitioner is said to be illegal on ground Nos. 1, 2, 6 and 7. The typed proforma of notice is as under:

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that prior to 30th July, 1992 prior approval of appointment was not required and only after Government regulations framed in the year 1992 contained in Chapter III, Regulations 101 to 107 the necessity of prior approval was required for appointment of class IV employee and had not lapsed and that it has been filled up in accordance with law. Admittedly, the learned Standing Counsel does not dispute that the petitioner was appointed on 14.3.1986 i.e., about much prior to the Regulations 101 to 107 introduced by amendment in 1992 and therefore the procedure prescribed for filling up the post was not applicable.

After hearing learned Counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that prior approval was not required for appointment of class IV employee on the post of peon at the relevant time and that regulation prescribing procedure of appointment on class IV posts in institutions including taking of prior approval have been framed at a later stage much after the appointments of the petitioner, they do not apply to the facts and circumstances of this case. Hence the observations made by D.I.O.S. in Annexure4 are incorrect.

For the reasons stated above, the writ petition is allowed. The petitioner is already being paid in terms of interim mandamus issued by the Court in its order dated 7.3.1889 regarding payment of current salary to him. It is further directed that his appointment shall be treated as valid. No order as to costs.