JUDGMENT M. Katju, J.
1. This writ petition has been filed praying for a writ of certiorari to quash the impugned order dated 19.7.2001, Annexure-9 to the writ petition and letter dated 19.6.2001, Annexure-10 to the writ petition.
2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
3. The petitioner's father was working as Senior Manager in U. P. Sahkari Gram Vikas Bank and died in harness on 9.8.1998. The petitioner is a law graduate and he applied for appointment under the dying in harness rules vide application dated 9.9.1998, Annexure-1 to the writ petition. By order dated 4.2.1999, the Registrar wrote to the Managing Director that the petitioner does not possess the requisite qualification for appointment, vide Annexure-2 to the writ petition. Thereafter the petitioner met the Administrator of the Bank and applied for appointment to some post lower than Senior Manager. He also applied for the appointment as Manager (law) on compassionate ground to the Administrator. The Administrator then wrote to the Managing Director to Issue appointment letter of the post of Manager (law) vide Annexure-3 to the writ petition. Consequently the appointment letter was issued to the petitioner as Manager (law) Hide Annexure-4 to the writ petition. A perusal of this letter shows that the petitioner was appointed on ad hoc capacity and subject to the approval of the U. P. Co-operative Industrial Service Board. This letter was amended on 22.3.1999 vide Annexure-5 to the writ petition. The petitioner joined as Manager (law) at Banda vide Annexure-6 to the writ petition and he has been working on that post and was granted increment vide Annexure-7 to the writ petition. However, by orders dated 19.7.2001 and 19.6.2001, Annexures-9 and 10 to the writ petition, the petitioner was reverted to the post of Accountant. It is alleged that this was done without giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Aggrieved, this writ petition has been filed.
4. A counter-affidavit has been filed in which it was stated in paragraph 5 that the appointment of persons dying-in-harness can only be considered for group--'C' and 'D' post which are outside the purview of Public Service Commission vide G.O. dated 30.11.1989, Annexure-C.A.1 to the counter-affidavit. In paragraph 7 of the counter-affidavit, ft is stated that the petitioner's appointment was only temporary and ad hoc and subject to the approval of the Service Institutional Board and the Board did not approve the petitioner's appointment even on ad hoc basis as Manager (law). True copy of the letter dated 11.7.2001 of the Board in this connection is Annexure C.A. 3 to the counter-affidavit. In paragraph 9. It is stated that the petitioner was neither eligible nor qualified for the post of Manager (law) which is a group-'B' post. In paragraph 11 of the counter-affidavit, it is stated that the petitioner has been appointed as Assistant Accountant in accordance with the relevant Rules.
5. In our opinion, the petitioner has no right to be appointed as Manager (law) under the dying-in-harness rules. The service conditions of the respondent bank are governed by the U. P. Co-operative Societies Service Regulations, 1975, according to which no appointment can be made in the bank without approval of U. P. Co-operative Institutional Board. Since the Board did not give approval to the petitioner's appointment, obviously the petitioner had no right to get that appointment. The ad hoc appointment of the petitioner as Manager (law) does not give him any right to the post. Moreover as held by the Supreme Court in State of Bihar v. Samsuz Zotia, AIR 1996 SC 1961, an applicant for compassionate appointment does not have any right to claim a particular appointment. !n our opinion, the post of Manager (law) falls in class-II category. Hence the petitioner has no right for appointment to that post under dying-in-harness rules.
6. The petition is dismissed.