KUSUM DWIVEDI vs STATE OF U P

Heard.

This writ petition was filed in the year 1994 challenging an order of the Regional Deputy Director Education (II), IVth Division, Allahabad by which the representation of the petitioner was considered in terms of the decision passed in earlier writ petition filed by her alongwith Krishna Devi.

On a perusal of the impugned order, the Court finds that the petitioner alongwith Krishna Devi was appointed by the management as Assistant Teacher, L.T. Grade after the sanction of a new section in standard 6 and 9, but, on the date of selection neither any vacancy in L.T. Grade was existing nor any new post had been created. However, considering the fact that on 18.7.1991, two posts in the Lecturer Grade had been created out of which one was vacant, taking a compassionate view in the matter, the management was asked to send the papers for approval of appointment of one of the two candidates against one post of Lecturer Grade treating it to be L.T. grade. Accordingly the name of Krishna Devi was proposed and accepted by the Deputy Director by the impugned order, but, so far as the appointment of the petitioner is concerned, as there was no sanctioned post as such her selection and appointment was not approved. Even the approval in respect of the Krishna Devi was till selected candidates come from the Commission. As far as the petitioner is concerned it was ordered that the management may pay salary from its own resources. However, this Court on 12.5.1994 passed an interim order directing the opposite parties to permit the petitioner to continue to serve on the post held by her and pay her the salary and allowances till further orders, in pursuance to which it is said that the petitioner is still continuing and being paid. However it is not known as to whether the salary is being paid from the State exchequer or not.

In view of the above, the Court does not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order as the reasons given therein do not suffer from any legal infirmity. However if the petitioner has been paid salary from the State exchequer, the concerned respondents shall consider as to whether any post was created in the institution after passing of the impugned order and is still vacant and whether the petitioner can be adjusted against the same. However in the absence of such an eventuality, no relief would be admissible to the petitioner except that whatsoever emoluments had been paid, if any, from the State exchequer the same shall not be recovered from her. Since the selection and appointment of the petitioner was de-hors the Rules, no relief, apart from the above, can be granted at this stage.

Subject to the aforesaid, the writ petition is dismissed.