Court No. - 43
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 62799 of 2014 Petitioner :- C/M Lal Bahadur Shastri Inter College Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Ors Counsel for Petitioner :- M. Saeed Siddiqui Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.
Petitioner before this Court is an educational institution which is imparting education uptill Intermediate Level and is recognised under the provisions of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921. Recognition to run classes upto intermediate level has been granted to it on 25.9.1982. Prior to it, the institution was recognised upto High School level. Benefit of aid under the Payment of Salaries Act, 1971 has been extended to the institution for the first time in the year 1980. The institution is aggrieved by an order of the respondent State authorities, determining the sanctioned strength of teaching and non-teaching staff in the institution concerned. As per the determination made, there exists one post of Principal, twelve posts of L.T. Grade teacher, one post of Clerk and nine posts of class-IV employees. The total sanctioned strength, therefore, works out to twenty three. This determination appears to have been made on the basis of last salary bill of the institution at the time when the institution was taken on the list of aided institutions.
Petitioner submits that in the year 1980 only twenty three posts were sanctioned, as has been noticed by the respondents also. The institution, however, was upgraded to intermediate level on 25.9.1982. Since teaching upto intermediate level was made permissible, an order dated 10.11.1983 came to be passed by the Director of Education, sanctioning additional four posts of Lecturer, two posts in clerical cadre and one post of Assistant Teacher. On the basis of additional posts so created, salary was also disbursed in the institution to thirty staff members. It is alleged that while determining the sanctioned strength, respondents have now unilaterally reduced the number of sanctioned posts to twenty three by ignoring the order dated 10.11.1983.
A counter affidavit has been filed in which it is stated in paragraph no.4 that the sanctioned strength of teaching and non teaching staff has been determined on the basis of materials which have been made available to the committee which had examined the existence of posts in the institution. It is also stated that the institution has not furnished any document, evidencing creation of additional posts in the year 1983.
Petitioner has specifically referred to the order dated 10.11.1983 in paragraph no.11 of the writ petition. This order sanctions four posts of lecturer, one post of head clerk, one post of Assistant Clerk and one post of Assistant Teacher. The total number of sanctioned staff, who would be entitled to receive salary therefore, stood enhanced from twenty three to thirty. Issuance of this order, on behalf of the Director of Education, who is the competent authority to create posts under Section 9 of the Payment of Salaries Act, 1971, is not in issue. Salary also apparently was being paid to teachers appointed against additional strength sanctioned on 10.11.1983. This aspect, however, has been completely omitted from consideration by the authorities of the State while determining the sanctioned strength of teaching and non teaching staff.
Contention of the respondents that these documents were not furnished by the petitioner, would not clinch the controversy inasmuch as issuance of order dated 10.11.1983 is not disputed. This order was otherwise within the knowledge of the authorities and they were expected to verify their own records for determining sanctioned strength of the teaching and non- teaching staff. Since the respondents have not taken note of their own specific order passed by the Director, creating additional vacancies in the institution on 10.11.1983, the determination of sanctioned posts made by the respondents would not be sustainable in law.
This writ petition accordingly succeeds and is allowed. A direction is issued to the respondents to reconsider the sanctioned vacancies in the institution in question after specifically taking note of the order dated 10.11.1983, as well as the fact that salary was also being disbursed in accordance with such orders. The required decision would be taken at the level of respondent no. 1, within a period of three months from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order.
Order Date :- 29.5.2019 n.u.