The Allahabad High Court while allowing the petition observed that under regulation 3 of the Intermediate Education Act, does not confer any power on the District Inspector of Schools to interfere with the seniority list published by the Committee of Management of any institution.
A Single Bench of Justice Subhash Vidyarthi passed this order while hearing a petition filed by C/M Kunwar Rukum Singh Vaidik Inter College and Another.
By means of the petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners-Committee of Management, Kunwar Rukum Singh Vaidik Inter College, Badaun and its Manager have challenged validity of an order dated 27.03.2024 passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Badaun, rejecting the seniority list of Lecturers in the petitioners’ institution, prepared by the petitioners and directing them to issue a fresh seniority list as per the earlier seniority list published by the petitioners in the year 2020-21 in furtherance of an order dated 02.03.2017 passed by the Joint Director of Education, Bareilly Division, Bareilly.
The petitioners have also challenged validity of an order dated 15.04.2024 passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Badaun, directing the petitioners to hand over charge of the post of Principal to the opposite party no 4, failing which the proceedings will be initiated for superseding the managing committee of the college.
The Court noted that,
On the last date, the Court had passed an order that locus standi of the petitioners to challenge validity of the seniority list will be examined by this Court as the committee of management has challenged the seniority list and the persons affected by the impugned order, who would become junior to the opposite party no 4 by implementation of the impugned order, has not come forward to assail validity of the impugned orders.
Regarding locus standi of the petitioners, the counsel for the petitioners has submitted that under the provisions contained in Regulation 3 of Chapter II of the Regulations framed under U.P Intermediate Education Act, 1921 the Committee of Management has been given the responsibility to prepare a seniority list of teachers. Officiating Principals are appointed in accordance with the seniority of the teachers.
In exercise of powers conferred by Regulation 3 of Chapter II of the aforesaid regulations, the petitioners have fixed seniority of teachers, as per which it is entitled to appoint the senior-most teacher Dr Yogendra Pal as officiating principal of the college.
By the impugned order, the opposite party no 3 has directed the petitioners to issue a fresh seniority list by placing the opposite party no 4 at the senior-most position and hand over the charge of the principal of the college. This order would affect the petitioners directly, as it mandates the petitioners to issue a fresh seniority list as per the directions issued by the opposite party no 3 and to hand over charge of the post of Principal to the opposite party no 4, who is not otherwise entitled to be appointed as Principal as per the seniority list issued by the petitioners.
In view of the aforesaid fact, the Court opined that the petitioners are affected by the impugned orders and they have the locus standi to challenge the same by filing a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
The Court further noted that the petitioners have published a seniority list of teachers for the year 2023-24, which has been disapproved by the District Inspector of Schools.
The Court observed that regulation 3 does not confer any power on the District Inspector of Schools to interfere with the seniority list published by the Committee of Management of any institution. Regulation 3(1)(f) provides that any person aggrieved by fixation of his seniority, may file an appeal before the Regional Deputy Director of Education and the appellate authority can pass suitable orders in exercise of his appellate jurisdiction. However, even the Regional Deputy Director of Education has not been granted any authority to interfere with the seniority list issued by the Committee of Management under the provisions of Regulation 3(1) of Chapter II of the regulations framed under the Act.
“In any case, the District Inspector of Schools has no authority under provisions of the regulations framed under the U.P Intermediate Education Act or under any other statutory provision to interfere with the seniority list issued by the committee of management of the college or to issue a direction to the committee of management to issue a fresh seniority list and to appoint officiating principal as per the modified seniority list to be issued as per the directions of the District Inspector of Schools.
In view of the aforesaid discussion, the Court is of the considered opinion that the impugned orders dated 27.03.2024 and 15.04.2024 are unsustainable in law”, the Court further observed while allowing the petition.
Both the orders dated 27.03.2024 and 15.04.2024 passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Badaun are hereby quashed by the High Court.