Ravendra Pal Singh vs District Inspector of Schools and Others

R.A. Sharma, J.—Sri Sunil Kumar, Respondent No. 3 here claiming to be the son of late Rampal Singh alleged Principal of Munshl Gajadhar Singh Inter College, Koraari, Aligarh made an application for his appointment on compassionate ground due to death in harness of his father. The District Inspector of Schools not having acceded to his request, he filed a writ petition before this Court in which the learned Single Judge of this Court has passed the following interim order:

Issue notice.

Until further orders, the operation of the impugned order dated 28-6-1993 passed by Respondent No. 2 (anocxure-10 to the writ petition) shall remain stayed.

Respondents are directed to allow the Petitioner to work as adhoc Principal of Munshi Gajadhar Singb inter College, Komari Aligarh, and to pay him salary for the post of Principal.

Although Dying in Harness Rules, 1974 are not applicable to Intermediate Colleges but the Government of U.P has issued an order for making such appointments to class III and Class IV posts only if the employee of the institution has died in harness. Respondent No. 3 wanted to be appointed as Principal of the Intermediate College after the death of his father but no appointment can be made on the post of Principal on compassionate ground. Government order referred to above has permitted appointments on compassionate ground only to class HI and Class IV posts and to the post of Principal of the College that apart appointment to post of Principal of Intermediate College can only be made on the basis of selection of suitable candidate* by Secondary Education Service Commission.

The learned Single Judge was as such not justified in passing the interim order directing the Respondents to permit the Respondent No. 3 to work as adboc Principal of the College and to pay him the salary of the post of Principal.

It is not open to the Court to grant by way of interim order a relief which will be available at the time of disposal of the petition unless there are such special reasons to be recorded in the order itself.

The Supreme Court in U.P. Junior Doctors'' Action Committee and Others Vs. Dr. B. Sheetal Nandwani and Others, held it it a well known rule of practice and procedure that at interlocutory stage a relief which is asked for and is available at the disposal of the matter is not granted unless there is any special reason to be indicated in clear term.

Following the above decision of the Supreme Court the Division Bench of this Court has reitesated the same Principle. In this connection reference may be made to the decision in State of U.P. v. Smt. Dayawati Khanna (Special Appeal No. 243 of 1994) decided on April 21, 1994 wherein it was laid down as under:

There is a settled and well established rule of practice which by convention and long usage has almost hardened into a rule of law, namely, that relief asked for and available at the stage of final disposal of writ proceedings, is not, except of or special reasons, to be granted as interim relief at the interlocutory stage. Blatant Disregard of this rule is revealed here.

In the instant case learned Single Judge has granted a relief to the Petitioner-Respondent which may not be made available to him even at the time of final disposal of the writ petition. The impugned order dose not contain any special reason as ton why such an order was passed.

For the reasons given above, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order of the learned Single Judge dated 29-9-1993 is set aside. No order as to costs.