ORDER Vincet Saran, J.
1. Heard Sri Y.K. Saxena for the petitioner as well as Sri Anil Kumar for respondent No. 2 and learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos. 1, 3 and 4.
2. By means of this writ petition, a prayer has been made for quashing the order dated 19.2.2003 passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Gorakhpur.
3. The facts in brief are that in pursuance to the Advertisement No. 1 of 2002 dated 3.3.2002 for appointment of Principal in Bhumidhar Inter College Slkriganj, Gorakhpur, the respondent No. 6 Kaushal Kishore Singh had admittedly been selected as Principal of the said college by the U. P. Secondary Education Service Selection Board, Allahabad vide its order dated 25.11.2002. Thereafter on 26.12.2002 the District Inspector of Schools, Gorakhpur directed that the selected candidate may be given the charge of Principal of the college but despite repeated requests, the charge of Principal has not been handed over to the selected candidate by the petitioner and hence, the impugned order dated 19.2.2003 has been passed.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not disputed that the respondent No. 6 is the duly selected candidate and he ought to be given charge but has only contended that in case if the Committee of Management fails to comply with the directions of the District Inspector of Schools, the procedure for giving the charge is that the selected candidate may approach the Director of Education (Secondary) under Section 17 of the U. P. Secondary Education (Service Selection Board) Act, 1982 and thus even though the petitioner may not be handing over charge, the District Inspector of Schools could not have passed the impugned order. It has further been submitted that the power to appoint the Principal lies exclusively with Committee of Management and no other authority.
5. Along with the writ petition the earlier order dated 26.12.2002, mention of which has been made in the impugned order, has not been filed by the petitioner. It appears that by the said order, the Committee of Management had been directed to give charge of Principal to the selected candidate but the petitioner refused to hand over charge.
6. Since it is not disputed by the petitioner that he was only working as ad hoc Principal till regularly selected candidate joins the post, once after the Selection Board had selected the candidate and the District Inspector of Schools has directed for the appointment of the selected candidate in accordance with law, the ad hoc Principal, i.e., the petitioner, cannot approach this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India claiming that there are certain irregularities, specially when he himself is responsible for not handing over the charge of Principal. From the facts, it is absolutely clear that the petitioner wants to continue with the charge of Principal of the college on ad hoc basis till as long as he can by some means or the other and in such effort this writ petition has been filed only to defer the implementation of the selection as well as appointment of the regularly selected candidate. In my view, no case for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been made out as the petitioner has failed to show any right under which he can be permitted to continue to work on the post of ad hoc Principal of the college.