Court No. - 39
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13226 of 2019 Petitioner :- Indrajeet Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Virendra Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Awadhesh Kumar
Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned standing counsel for respondent Nos. 1 & 2 and Sri Awadhesh Kumar, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 3 & 4.
Considering the nature of order proposed to be passed, there is no need to issue notice to respondent No. 5.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is an educational institution in the name of Krishak Laghu Madhyamik Vidyalaya Sawndeeh, Basti (hereinafter referred to as the 'Institution') duly recognized Junior High School under the U.P. Basic Shiksha Parishad. Director of Education, Basic Allahabad has also granted permission for additional section in Junior High School in Class- VI to VIII vide order dated 21.10.2005. The said Institution is also in the list of grant-in-aid list from December, 2006 and four Assistant Teachers are getting salary from the State Government. Due to retirement of certain assistant teachers, vacancy arose and respondent No. 5 advertised the post and ultimately Selection Committee recommended the name of petitioner for appointment. Accordingly, appointment letter dated 08.08.2016 was issued to the petitioner. Pursuant to that, petitioner had submitted his joining on 12.08.2016 and since then he is working on the post of Assistant Teacher. Even after joining, salary was not paid to the petitioner, therefore, he has moved an application for payment of salary on 09.12.2016 before respondent No. 3 and thereafter, he has also moved several reminders. Ultimately, respondent No. 3 sought the report from respondent No. 5 vide letter dated 20.05.2019, which was duly replied by respondent No. 5 vide letter dated 28.05.2019, but till date no decision has been taken. It is next submitted that the authority to take decision is vested with respondent No. 2 and it is required on the part of respondent No. 3 to submit his report before him for final decision, but till date it appears that respondent No. 3 has not submitted his report/recommendation before respondent No.
2. Lastly, it is submitted that a suitable direction may be issued to respondent No. 3 to submit his report/recommendation before respondent No. 2 at the earliest and thereafter respondent No. 2 may be directed to take final decision in the matter for payment of salary.
Learned standing counsel as well as Sri Awadhesh Kumar, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 3 & 4 submitted that decision shall be taken at the earliest in accordance with law.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent no.3 to send his report/recommendation to respondent No. 2 within two weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order and respondent No. 2 is directed to take final decision upon the recommendation of respondent No. 3 within next three weeks strictly in accordance with law from the date of receiving of report/recommendation of respondent No. 3.
It is made clear that Court has not adjudicated the case on merits and it is upon the respondent no.2 to decide the application of the petitioner after considering the Rules and Government Order occupying the field.
Order Date :- 26.9.2019 Sartaj