Mumtaz Ahmad vs Deputy Director of Education,Allahabad Region,Allahabad & Ors.

Aloke Chakrabarti, J.—This writ petition was filed challenging the order dated 641994 passed by the Deputy Director of Education Allahabad at Annexure 11 to the writ petition as also the order dated 1691993 passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Allahabad at Annexure 9 to the writ petition and for other reliefs.

The facts stated in the writ petition are that Majidia Islamia Inter College at Allahabad is a minority institution and there a post of Lecturer in Commerce fell vacant on retirement of Sri Mohammad Ahmad, the then permanent lecturer on 3061990. A resolution was taken by the Committee of Management on 7101990 to grant promotion to Sri Salamullah, a permanent Assistant Teacher in L T Grade and papers were forwarded to the District Inspector of Schools Allahabad for financial approval. In view of the fact Sri Salamullah did not possess requisite qualification for the post of Lecturer in Commerce the Committee of Management of the institution on 2761993 passed a resolution withdrawing the earlier resolution to promote Sri Salamullah. An advertisement was published in Northern India Patrika on 441993 and in the selection process the petitioner was selected and was issued an appointment letter dated 1281993. The District Inspector of Schools by his order dated 1691993 declined to approve the said appointment. On the appeal being filed by the Committee of Management, the Deputy Director of Education Allahabad by his order dated 641994 rejected the appeal, hence challenging the said two orders the present writ petition was filed.

The learned counsel for the petitioner states that ordinarily after introduction of U. P. Secondary Education service and Selection Board Act 1982 the provisions of Regulation 20 of Chapter II of the Regulations framed under the U. P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 do not apply but in the present case of minority institution the said 1982 Act does apply in view of the provisions of Section 30 of the said Act providing for exemption to minority institution. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that still then the said Regulation 20 is not to apply as in such a case it will amount to a discrimination as posts do not lapse under Regulation 20 for nonminority institutions. It is contended that as the law has been explained Regulation 20 does not apply in the case of nonminority institution after introduction of the said Act of 1982. Claiming parity and similar treatment, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the posts in minority institutions also do not lapse under Regulation 20 of Chapter II of the said Regulations.

After considering the aforesaid contention, I find that the minority institutions do enjoy exemption by a statutory provision as contained in the 1982 Act itself. Therefore, the contention on the ground of discrimination cannot be acceptable as there is a reasonable classification between the two classes of institutions when the minority institutions enjoy special protection under the Constitutional provisions as also the provisions contained in the particular Act applicable herein. Moreover the reason itself for nonapplication of Regulation 20 on introduction of the 1982 Act is nonexistent because of exemption.

Therefore, on admitted facts herein, the provisions of Regulation 20 continue to apply. On admitted facts that the concerned post remained vacant for more than prescribed period resulting in the lapse of the post concerned and consequently the appointment of the petitioner became illegal as was made against such a vacancy. The contention relating to appointment of one Salamullah on promotion in the meantime has been admitted by the petitioner himself to be an invalid appointment such appointment was never approved and was withdrawn by the Committee of Management itself. Therefore, such an appointment could not prevent application of Regulation 20 of the said Regulations.

When admittedly the post though was required to be filled up by promotion and it could not be so filled up by promotion as there was no qualified candidate available, the same became a post required to be filled up by direct recruitment and this position was prevailing immediately when the post fell vacant. Therefore, application of Regulation 20 of Chapter II cannot be disputed in such a case.

In the above view of the findings, the writ petition fails and is here by dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.