Hon'ble Dr. Vijay Laxmi,J.
Cause shown is sufficient and the delay has been sufficiently explained.. The delay condonation application is allowed.
Appeal be treated within time and be allotted a regular number. Order Date :- 28.7.2016 Om.
.
(Dr. Vijay Laxmi, J.) (Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, J.) .
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Court No. - 1 Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 300 of 2016 Appellant :- Nirmal Kumar Srivastava (Inre 1189 S/S 1998) Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secretary Secondary Education & 6 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Ramesh Pandey,Aatraya Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Amreshwar Pratap Sahi,J.
Hon'ble Dr. Vijay Laxmi,J.
Learned Standing Counsel is already represented on behalf of respondent 1 to 5. No one has received notices on behalf of respondents no. 6 and 7. Issue notice to respondents no. 6 and 7 returnable at an early date. Steps within a week. The appellant questions the correctness of the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 9.6.2016 on the ground that the learned Single Judge has not appreciated the correct status of the vacancy that had occurred and was available as on the date of resolution which was passed in favour of the appellant. The contention is that the post occupied by Sri Satya Dev Dubey, which was a C.T. Grade post had fallen vacant. Sri Rajendra Prasad Srivastava a L.T. Grade Teacher was promoted from L.T. Grade to Lecturers Grade on ad-hoc basis. Sri Satya Dev Dubey had been thereupon promoted on ad-hoc basis as an L.T. Grade Teacher. It is in this background that the appellant was appointed on ad-hoc basis on the post that had fallen vacant due to the ad-hoc promotion of Sri Satya Dev Dubey. It is further submitted that the said post was of C.T. Grade which was declared to be a dying cadre but the post had not been abolished nor had it vanished as it stood converted into L.T. Grade under the relevant Government Orders, and consequently the vacancy was existing which fact does not appear to have been appreciated by the learned Single Judge while proceeding to record a finding that no vacancy existed. Learned counsel has then invited the attention of the Court to the approval order dated 30.12.1997 of Satya Dev Dubey as also that of appellant dated 23.4.1998 which was -2- passed keeping in view the interim order dated 23.3.1998 passed in the writ petition that has given rise to this appeal. In the aforesaid background and in view of the fact that the claim of the appellant may likely be covered by the provisions of section 33G of the U.P. Secondary Education Services Selection Board Act, 1983 a prima-facie case has been made out for entertaining this appeal. The appellant has been continuing in service since 1998 and discharging his duties. In view of the aforesaid background we direct that the appellant shall continue to get the protection of the interim order passed by the learned Single Judge in the writ petition dated 23.3.1998 on the same terms till disposal of this appeal and the operation of the impugned judgment dated 9.6.2016 shall remain stayed. Order Date :- 28.7.2016 Om.
.
(Dr. Vijay Laxmi, J.) (Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, J.)