The Allahabad High Court has held that the writ of quo warranto can be issued only when a candidate who is not possessing essential qualification for the post has been appointed.
A single-judge bench of Justice Saral Srivastava passed this order while hearing a petition filed by Ram Lakhan. In this matter, the petitioner claimed to be an Assistant Teacher in DAV Inter College, Sakeet, Etah.
The private respondent was initially appointed as Lecturer in Indrajeet Shiksha Sadan Inter College, Jot, Mainpur in 1992 and later on, he was appointed as Principal in DAV Inter College, Sakeet, Etah in 2010.
It is contended that appointment of the private respondent as Principal in DAV Inter College, Sakeet, Etah is illegal inasmuch as process of appointment was completed within 38 days without following the due procedure as provided under the law.
It is further submitted that the private respondent has obtained BEd degree while he was in service which was not permissible.
The Court observed that on complaint of petitioner, District Inspector of Schools, Etah issued a notice to the private respondent, who submitted his reply. The District Inspector of Schools on being satisfied with the reply of the private respondent, rejected the complaint of petitioner by order dated July 09, 2021.
The petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated July 9, 2021 and has further prayed for a writ of quo warranto for declaring the appointment of the private respondent as illegal and null and void.
The Court noted,
“It is not in dispute that the private respondent was appointed in 1992. Later on, private respondent had submitted an application pursuant to an advertisement published in 2003 for selection on the post of Principal in DAV Inter College, Sakeet, Etah.”
The private respondent was selected, and accordingly, he was appointed as Principal since 2010 in DAV Inter College , Sakeet, Etah.
The petitioner neither in the complaint nor in the petition has alleged that the private respondent does not possess essential qualification for being appointed as Lecturer and Principal.
Also Read: Delhi air pollution: Supreme Court asks air quality panel to come up with permanent solution
The Court held,
“The writ of quo warranto can be issued only when a candidate who is not possessing essential qualification for the post has been appointed, and as necessary ingredients on which writ of quo warranto can be issued are lacking in the petition, therefore, the Court is not inclined to issue a writ of quo warranto.”
It is also worth to mention that petitioner is Assistant Teacher in the DAV Inter College, Sakeet, Etah and he has personal interest in challenging the appointment of the private respondent inasmuch as if he succeeds in removing the private respondent, he being the senior-most teacher in the college may be considered to be appointed as Officiating Principal or Ad-hoc Principal.
In such view of the fact also, the Court is not inclined to grant the relief prayed to the petitioner to settle his private score with the private respondent, the Court observed.
Thus, for the reasons given above, the writ petition lacks merit and is accordingly, dismissed, the court ordered.
- Vanniyar quota: Supreme Court declines to stay Madras HC order, says existing appointments won’t not be disrupted
- Calcutta High Court rejects PIL against e-rickshaws in Howrah district, says rules allow them to ply without permit
- Delhi air pollution: Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan file affidavits on payment in lieu of wages to construction workers