Allahabad High Court
Shashikant Pandey vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 1 April, 2022
Author: Siddharth
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD Court No. - 32 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10068 of 2021 Petitioner :- Shashikant Pandey Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Samarath Singh,Hritudhwaj Pratap Sahi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Jai Singh Yadav,Prabhakar Awasthi,Vijay Kumar Mishra Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard Sri Sankalp Narayan, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Samarth Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent nos.1 ad 2; Sri Jai Singh Yadav, learned counsel for respondent no.3 and Sri Prabhakar Awasthi, learned counsel for respondent no.4.
This writ petition has been filed praying for quashing of the order dated 13.07.2021, passed by District Inspector of Schools, Prayagraj, whereby he has approved promotion of respondent no.4, Ravi Shankar Pandey, on the post of Assistant Clerk and in effect rejected the claim of the petitioner for the aforesaid post.
The brief facts of the petition are that the institution of the petitioner namely, Sarvarya Mahavidyalaya Inter College, Prayagraj, is duly recognised Intermediate institution and in grant-in-aid list of the Government. The petitioner joined the institution on the Class IV posts on 01.08.2017. There are three sanctioned posts of Class III employee in the institution, one of Head Clerk and two posts of Assistant Clerk. One posts of Assistant Clerk was occupied by one, Jagdish, who was appointed by way of direct recruitment and other posts was occupied by one promotee, Anushashan Singh. The post held by Sri Anushashan Singh fell vacant on account of his death on 28.12.2015.
The post being of promotion quota in terms of Chapter III, Regulation 2 of the Intermediate Education Act, the petitioner applied for promotion thereon on 07.01.2016. Ignoring the aforesaid application of the petitioner Committee of Management of institution / respondent no.3, vide resolution dated 22.12.2020, recommended the name of respondent no.4 and rejected the name of petitioner on the ground that he did not had requisite qualification of having CCC Certificate by DOEACC society. The petitioner represented before the District Inspector of Schools on 15.03.2021 against the resolution of the Committee of Management claiming that he is senior to respondent no.4 but his claim was ignored.
The Committee of Management forwarded the aforesaid resolution in favour of respondent no.4 by the letter dated 18.06.2021 to the District Inspector of Schools, Prayagraj, who has allowed the same by the impugned order dated 13.07.2021, which is under challenge.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned order has been passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Prayagraj accepting the resolution of the Committee of Management and declining the claim of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner did not had the qualification of CCC at the time when the resolution of the Committee of Management dated 22.12.2020 was passed. He acquired the aforesaid qualification after two months 22 days. Considering the same approval to the appointment of respondent no.4 has been granted by the District Inspector of Schools, Prayagraj by the impugned order.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that as per the government order dated 03.11.2015 the petitioner was required to possess the qualification of High School and knowledge of typing only since he was claiming appointment in the promotional quota and the Government Order no were provides of possession of CCC Certificate for the candidate claiming appointment under promotional quota. He has relied upon the judgement of this court in Writ-A No.5051 of 2020, Sanjai Rai Vs. State of U.P. and two others, wherein this Court has as follows :
"Admittedly, circular dated 3.11.2015 reads as under :-
dz0 iwoZ O;oLFkk orZeku O;oLFkk in uke osru CkS.M ,oa xzsM osru inuke osru CkS.M ,oa xzsM osru 'kSf{kd vgZrk ,oa HkrhZ dh fof/k 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 dfUk"B fyfid&lg Vad.k dfUk"B lgk;d dk;kZy; lgk;d] :Vhu fyfid osRku cS.M&1 :0 5200&20200 ,oa xszM osru :0 1900@& dfUk"B lgk;d osRku cS.M&1 :0 5200&20200 ,oa xszM osru :0 2000@& 80 izfr'kr lh/kh HkrhZ }kjkA vgZrk b.VjehfM,V ds lkFk&lkFk dEI;wVj lapkyu dk Mks;d (DOEAC) lksLkkbVh ifjofrZr uke ukbysV }kjk iznRr lh0lh0lh0 izek.k i= rFkk fgUnh@vaxzsth esa de ls de dze'k% 25@30 '''kCn izfr feUkV dh Vad.k xfrA 15 izfr'kr prqFkZ Js.kh ds ,sls dkfeZdksa ls inksUufr }kjk tks gkbZLdwy gks rFkk Vad.k Kku j[krs gksA 05 izfr'kr prqFkZ Js.kh ds ,sls dkfeZdksa ls inksUufr }kjk tks b.VjehfM,V gksa rFkk Vad.k Kku j[krs gksaA Thus it is clear from the circular that apparently it has been misinterpreted by the authority concerned to deny promotion to the petitioner in asmuch as this circular which was holding field at the time of accrual of the vacancy in the cadre of Assistant Clerk to which petitioner was seeking promotion from Class IV is in three parts. Part (i) deals with direct recruitment for which qualification of certificate from DOEACC alongwith qualification of Intermediate and proficiency in Hindi / Engligh typing with 25/30 w.p.m, has been prescribed, (ii) the circular deals with 20% promotion which has been split in two further sub categories of 15% for those class IV employees who are High School pass and having knowledge of typing whereas 5% quota is prescribed for those class IV employees who are Intermediate and having knowledge of typing.
After going through the circular and the record, I have no hesitation in holding that the authorities have misread this Government Circular dated 3.11.2015 as reproduced above."
Learned counsel for respondent no.4, Sri Prabhakar Awasthi, has vehemently opposed the arguments advanced on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioner and has submitted that the petitioner nowhere claimed that he was the competent to type and he did not had CCC certificate at the time when resolution of the Committee of Management was passed. He has further submitted that petitioner was also not having the CCC certificate from the DOEACC and therefore, he was not entitled to be promoted on the post of Assistant Clerk.
He has submitted that the petitioner applied for his promotion to the post of Assistant Clerk only on 07.01.2016 when the post became vacant on 25.12.2015. His further submission is that the claim of the petitioner has rightly been rejected since he was found ineligible for promotion to the post of Assistant Clerk by the Committee of Management of the institution.
After considering the rival submissions, this court find that the petitioner's case fell under the promotion quota and not under the 80% quota of direct recruitment. The qualification of possession of CCC certificate was relevant for the direct recruitment of Assistant clerks and not for the promotee as held by this Court in the case of Sanjai Rai (Supra). The petitioner was admittedly having qualification of Intermediate and was required to have knowledge of typing along with the same. The neither Committee of Management nor the District Inspector of Schools have considered this aspect of the matter. Both have treated the petitioner as the applicant for the post of direct recruitment and have declared him ineligible.
In view of the above, the order impugned 13.07.2021 passed by District Inspector of Schools, Prayagraj / respondent no.2 is hereby quashed. Since there is no dispute regarding educational qualification of the petitioner, the District Inspector of Schools will subject the petitioner to typing test. If he qualifies in the same, he will issue appointment letter in his favour. This exercise shall be completed within a period of six weeks from today.
The impugned order dated 13.07.2021 is quashed.
The writ petition is allowed.
Order Date :- 1.4.2022 SS