High CourtsSingle Bench(2008) 09 AHC CK 0031

Committee of Management Shri Swami Krishnanand Inter College and Shri Bhairav Prasad Tripathi vs State of U.P. and Others

Allahabad High Court · Decided on 12 September 2008

HON’BLE JUDGES
Rakesh Tiwari, J
RESULT
Dismissed

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

10 paragraphs · 639 words

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

2.

The petitioner Committee of Management Shri Swami Krishnanand Inter College, Belwar Jaunpur has filed this writ petition praying for a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 16.1.2008 appended as Annexure-7 to the writ petition passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Jaunpur and also for a direction to the respondents not to interfere in the functioning of the Committee of Management.

3.

By the impugned order dated 16.1.2008 the DIOS has directed the Committee of Management to allow the selected candidate Sri Jitendra Kumar Mishra to join as Assistant Teacher in Music selected by the UP. Madhyamik Shiksha Sewa Selection Board, otherwise stern action should be taken against the Committee of Management under 1982 Rules.

4.

It appears from the impugned order that the requisition had been sent for filling up the post of Assistant Teacher in Music by a general category. Consequently, Sri Jitendra Kumar Mishra was selected as Assistant Teacher in Music by the Selection Board. It also appears that thereafter the petitioner Committee of Management has made an adhoc appointment of respondent No. 7 Sri Manoj Kumar Mishra as Assistant Teacher in Music on 12.6.97.

5.

It further appears that respondent No. 7 filed W.P. No. 6170 of 2007 before this Court challenging the selection of respondent No. 6, the selected candidate which was dismissed vide judgment and order dated 8th September, 2008.

6.

Now the Committee of Management has come up in this writ petition apparently to support the appointment of respondent No. 7 Sri Manoj Kumar Mishra to whom they have appointed as adhoc Assistant Teacher in Music and to defeat the claim of respondent No. 6, Sri Jitendra Kumar Mishra, the candidate selected by the Selection Commission.

7.

In the arguments advanced by the learned Counsel for the petitioners an u-turn has been taken by him by stating that there is no post of general category in Music to be filled up in the college in question when the selected candidate Sri Jitendra Kumar Mishra approached to join the post and that the Board should send Assistant Teacher in Music from the reserved category.

8.

It is on this ground the Committee of Management has not permitted respondent No. 6 to joint the post regarding which the impugned order has been issued by the DIOS giving warning to the petitioner for taking stern action under the U.P. Madhyamik Shiksha Sewa Selection Board Niyamawali, 1982.

9.

Admittedly, the petitioner had sent requisition for filling up the post of Assistant Teacher in Music by a candidate from general category which is also apparent from the original requisition placed before this Court by the learned Counsel appearing for the Selection Board, Sri R.P. Dubey. This fact is also clear from perusal of the impugned order that the institution had sent the requisition for filling the post of Assistant Teacher in Music by a general category candidate. It is also an admitted fact that respondent No. 7 has been appointed by the Committee of Management on adhoc basis on the post of Assistant Teacher in Music who also belongs to general category on which now respondent No. 6 has been selected as Assistant Teacher from general category. The writ petition filed by respondent No. 7 has also been dismissed by the High Court. In the aforesaid backdrop the Committee of Management can not support the case of respondent No. 7 or take u-turn by wrongly stating that no post of general category is vacant when it has sent the requisition for filling up the post by general category candidate.

10.

For all the reasons stated above, this Court is not inclined to interfere in this matter under Article 226 of the Constitution. The writ petition is accordingly, dismissed. No order as to costs.