Court No. - 5
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14272 of 2021 Petitioner :- Swaminath Prasad And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ramesh Chandra Dwivedi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for respondents no.1 to 4.
The petitioner by means of present writ petition have prayed for following reliefs:-
"i. to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no.1 to consider for granting financial approval to the appointments of the petitioners as Assistant Teachers in Anusuchit Jati Primary Vidyalaya Malhani, Block Salempur, District Deoria, within the period to be stipulated by this Hon'ble Court;
ii. to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to pay arrears of salary and future salary to the petitioners as and when it falls due on the posts of Assistant Teachers in Anusuchit Jati Primary Vidyalaya Malhani, Block Salempur, District Deoria;
iii. to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no.1 to consider and pass appropriate order on the representation made by the petitioners, within the period to be stipulated by this Hon'ble Court."
The petitioners claim to have been appointed as Assistant Teachers in Anusuchit Jati Primary Vidyalaya Malhani, Block Salempur, District Deoria by appointment letters dated 07.06.2010. Thereafter, the papers relating to appointments of the petitioners were sent to the office of District Basic Education Officer, Deoria for granting approval by letter dated 10.06.2010. The petitioners claim that since, the District Basic Education Officer did not pass any order, therefore, their appointments are deemed to be approved after one month from the date it was received in the office of the District Basic Education Officer.
Learned Standing Counsel contends that according to the petitioners, their appointments have been made in the year 2010 and they have approached this Court for claiming aforesaid reliefs after eleven years from the date of their appointments, and, therefore, the writ petition is misconceived and liable to be dismissed on the ground of delay. He submits that the reliefs aforesaid cannot be granted to the petitioners inasmuch as their appointments are not in accordance with law and no approval to the appointments of petitioners was accorded as required under law. He further submits that the papers for grant of approval to the appointments of the petitioners have been sent by letter dated 10.06.2020, but there is no pleading in the writ petition as to the mode by which the papers for approval have been forwarded and the date on which it has been received and, therefore, the contention that the appointments of the petitioners are deemed to be approved is misconceived .
Be that as it may, as per averments made in the writ petition that the petitioners claim that they have been appointed in the year 2010 and the papers relating to their appointments have been forwarded by the committee of management on 10.06.2020, more than eleven years have passed, the petitioners have not approached this Court for claiming the aforesaid reliefs. There is no whisper in the writ petition explaining the delay for approaching this Court with inordinate delay of about more than eleven years from the date of appointments of the petitioners, therefore, this Court finds that the writ petition is not maintainable on the ground of delay and laches.
Further, the petitioner has stated that the selection committee was constituted and they have been appointed as per Rule but there is no whisper in the writ petition that the selection committee consisted of any nominee of the District Basic Education Officer as required under rule 9 of the Uttar Pradesh Recognized Basic Schools (Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Teachers and other Conditions) Rules, 1975.
It is pertinent to note that only bald averment in the writ petition has been made that the papers relating to appointments of the petitioners have been sent on 10.06.2020 which has been received in the office of District Basic Education Officer, Deoria, but perusal of letter dated 10.06.2020 appended as Annexure-5 to the writ petition does not contain any receiving by the office of the District Basic Education Officer, Deoria. There is no pleading in the writ petition as to the mode by which the papers relating to appointments of the petitioners have been sent to the office of the District Basic Education Officer, Deoria and therefore, the contention that the appointments of the petitioners are deemed to be approved is misconceived in the absence of necessary pleading.
For the reasons given above, the reliefs claimed for by the petitioner cannot be granted. Hence, the writ petition lacks merit and is dismissed.
Order Date :- 25.10.2021 SS