Learned counsel for the petitioners is directed to implead Km. Swaliha Begum as respondent No.4 in the array of respondents. Said incorporation be carried out forthwith.
Learned standing counsel has accepted notice on behalf of respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3. Sri Anil Bhushan, Advocate has entered appearance on behalf of newly impleaded respondent No.4.
Each one of the respondents is accorded six weeks' time to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit may be filed within next two weeks.
List this case after eight weeks.
In the present case, petitioners have rushed to this Court challenging the order of supersession which has been passed by the State Government in exercise of powers vested under Section 16 (4) of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921. Petitioners' contention is that in the past seniority list of teachers in the institution concerned had been finalized, and as per the same, as far as Km. Swaliha Begum is concerned, undisputedly, she is junior to Smt. Manju Agrawal and Smt. Lajja Tomar. Petitioners have contended that after the said seniority list had been finalized, another attempt was made by the Joint Director of Education to change the said seniority list, and at the said point of time Officiating Principal of the institution, Smt. Manju Agrawal preferred writ petition No.3829 of 2004. Said writ petition was allowed on 07.05.2004 disapproving the order passed by the Joint Director of Education re-determining the seniority list. Petitioners have stated that thereafter one Smt. Lajja Tomar was sought to be appointed as Officiating Principal. At the said point of time, Smt. Manju Agrawal proceeded to file writ petition No.14066 of 2010. In the said writ petition this Court proceeded to pass an interim order staying operation of the orders dated 11.02.2010 and 18.02.2010 and the District Inspector of School was commanded to ensure that officiating appointment of Principal was made strictly in accordance with the seniority list in force. Thereafter, it appears that Km. Swaliha Begum preferred writ petition No.26879 of 2010. This Court on 12.05.2010 asked the District Inspector of Schools to examine all aspects of the matter and ensure strict compliance of the order dated 18.03.2010 passed in writ petition No.14066 of 2010.
From the record, it appears that repeated letters have been sent by the District Inspector of Schools to the Committee of Management and accordingly, impugned action has been taken. Petitioners submit that the orders passed by this Court have been misread and misconstrued, inasmuch as this Court had proceeded to pass orders for ensuring that officiating arrangement on the post of Principal in the institution was made strictly in accordance with the seniority list in force. As Smt. Manju Agrawal was the senior most lecturer in the institution and in view of this no further steps were being taken and in case Management of the institution was in error at any stage of the proceedings, then the District Inspector of Schools had ample authority to remedy the situation by invoking and exercising the authority vested under Section 18 of U.P. Act No. 5 of 1982. Petitioners submit that once there was failure on the part of the District Inspector of Schools to invoke and exercise the authority vested under Section 18 of U.P. Act No. 5 of 1982, then for the said inaction, the Committee of Management of the institution ought not to have been penalized.
Sri Anil Bhushan, learned counsel representing Km. Swaliha Begum, has contended that as far as Smt. Manju Agrawal is concerned, the order had been passed against her withdrawing salary she had been getting in Lecturer's Grade, in view of this the Committee of Management was bound to pass resolution in favour of Km. Swaliha Begum, but as that has not been done, the action taken against the Committee of Management should not be interfered with. Coupled with this, the tenure of the Committee of Management has run out.
Prima facie, the record of the case reflects that the District Inspector of Schools has failed to invoke and exercise the authority vested under Section 18 of U.P. Act No. 5 of 1982, although he was directed by this Court to ensure officiating arrangement on the post of Principal strictly in accordance with the seniority list in force, but the District Inspector of Schools except for making correspondence inter se parties did not make any positive effort to ensure officiating arrangement on the post of Principal strictly in accordance with the seniority list in force and failed to invoke and exercise the authority vested under Section 18 of U.P. Act No. 5 of 1982. Thus, the District Inspector of Schools was clearly in error in making recommendation for supersession of the Committee of Management and that too when in the writ petition filed by Smt. Manju Agrawal interim order has been passed and till date she has been drawing salary in Lecturer's scale.
Be that as it may, as inaction has been there by the District Inspector of Schools in not taking appropriate action for ensuring arrangement on the post of Principal on officiating basis, and the District Inspector of Schools has failed to invoke and exercise the authority vested under Section 18 of U.P. Act No. 5 of 1982 in this background, and the order of supersession has been passed on wrong premises, it is hereby directed that operation of the order dated 22.05.2012 passed by respondent No.1 shall be kept in abeyance.
However, in the present case, as tenure of the Committee of Management is alleged to have run out and further as alleged in the body of the writ petition, fresh elections have been held and the papers have been transmitted to the District Inspector of Schools, the District Inspector of Schools is directed to transmit those papers to the Regional Level Committee, and the Regional Level Committee shall take decision thereon, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of the papers along with a certified copy of this order. In case, it is held by the Regional Committee that the elections have been validly held, charge would be handed over to newly elected Committee of Management, and during this interregnum period, salary to teachers and other employees shall be insured by way of single operation.
Order Date :- 6.7.2012 SRY