HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 7143 of 2024 Court No. - 6 HON'BLE SIDDHARTH NANDAN, J. 1. Heard Mr. Murali Manohar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents Nos. 1 to 4. Despite service of notice upon respondent No. 5, no one has put in appearance on his behalf. 2. By way of present writ petition the petitioner has assailed the order dated 05.04.2024 passed by the Regional Level Committee, Region Varanasi, Varanasi and Joint Director of Education, Region Varanasi, Varanasi, whereby his claim for regularization under Section 33-F of the U.P. Secondary Education Services Selection Board Act, 1982 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act, 1982”), has been rejected. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed in the institution on the post of Assistant Clerk on 04.12.1973; but however, subsequently, after resigning from the post of Assistant Clerk, in accordance with the prescribed procedure, he was appointed on the post of Assistant Teacher on 20.07.1992; pursuant to the resolution dated 28.06.1992 passed by the Committee of Management under the provisions of the U.P. Secondary Education Services Commission (Removal of Difficulties) (Second) Order, 1981; and he joined on the said post on 20.07.1992; he has also brought on record various letters of the Manager clarifying that only after resigning from the post of Assistant Clerk, the petitioner has joined as Assistant Teacher on 20.07.1992; hence, the Manager has requested the District Inspector of Schools (DIOS) to grant approval and release his salary with effect from 15.06.1993; which was eventually also granted by order dated 17.08.2006. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Murali Manohar, S.K. Srivastava Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Radhey Shyam Vishwakarma .....Petitioner(s) State Of Up And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) 4. It is further submitted that there was an ongoing seniority dispute with respect to one Shri Udal Prasad, who was an ad-hoc appointee to the post of Head Master; however, the said dispute was eventually resolved and he was held to be the senior-most teacher and approval was also granted by the DIOS for his appointment to the post of Head Master, with effect from 01.07.1992 vide order dated 23.03.1999, which has not been disputed by the respondents. 5. However, since his claim was not being considered under Section 33-F of the Act, 1982, he approached this Court by filing Writ-A No. 27726 of 2018 and this Court by its judgment dated 19.01.2024; after observing that the petitioner having been appointed on 20.07.1992 against a short- term vacancy on the post of Assistant Teacher (L.T. Grade), in the Institution, was paid salary pursuant to the orders of the Additional Director of Education, (Secondary), dated 06.03.2006, directed that the claim for regularization under Section 33-F of the Act, 1982, forwarded by the Manager of the Institution to the DIOS, be placed before the competent authority and the Regional Joint Director of Education, shall take a decision in the matter. For ready reference, the relevant extract of the judgment dated 19.01.2024 is reproduced herein below:- 2. Petitioner, who was appointed on 20th July, 1992, against a short term vacancy of Assistant Teacher in the L.T. Grade in the institution came to be paid salary under the order of Regional Joint Director of Education (Secondary) on 6th March, 2006, in which he had returned a finding to this effect that the petitioner had been lawfully appointed and, therefore, payment of his salary should be given to him. It appears that the petitioner was appointed on account of promotion of one Udal Prasad as Head Master of the institution in the year 1992, but approval to his position as head master of the institution, came to be granted only in the year 1998. Petitioner did continue against the said vacancy, which continued to be a short term vacancy but payment of salary was made to him only after the order of Additional Joint Director of Education (Secondary) dated 6th March, 2006. Petitioner claims regularization in view of the provisions as contained under Section 33 F of the U.P. Secondary Education Service Selection Board Act, 1982 (for short 'the Act'). It also transpires from the record that the papers for the purposes of regularization of the petitioner, have been forwarded by the Manager of the institution to the District Inspector of Schools to be placed before the competent authority on 04.01.2017 but no decision has been taken in the WRIA No. 7143 of 2024 2 matter. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that after approval was granted by the DIOS in favour of Sri Udal Prasad, on the post of Head Master with effect from 01.07.1992; it cannot be disputed that the petitioner was not working on the post of Assistant Teacher since 20.07.1992; and merely because of the dispute regarding salary, which otherwise he was entitled to receive, and the same not being paid to him, it cannot be said that he was not working as an Assistant Teacher, though approval was ultimately granted vide order dated 17.08.2006. Therefore, the petitioner was entitled to be regularized under the Government Order dated 30.12.2000, w.e.f. his initial date of appointment i.e. 20.07.1992. 7. He has also placed reliance upon the order dated 06.03.2006; to contend that the petitioner was appointed against the post vacated by Sri Udal Prasad. The relevant extract of the order dated 06.03.2006 is also reproduced hereinbelow:- "प्रश्नगत प्रकरण में स्पष्ट है िक श्री िवश्वकमार् की िनयुिक्त सहायक अध्यापक के पद पर श्री उदल प्रसाद की पदोन्नित से हुई िरिक्त के प्रित हुई है और श्री उदल प्रसाद को माननीय उच्च न्यायालय के आदेश से वेतन भुगतान कितपय प्रितबन्धों के अधीन िकया जा रहा है और प्रधानाचायर् पद पर िविनयिमत हो चुके हैं। श्री उदल प्रसाद की पदोन्नित से िरक्त पद पर श्री िवश्वकमार् िविधवत िनयुक्त है िजससे वेतन भुगतान में कोई िविधक किठनाई नहीं है।" 8. Furthermore, he submits that a perusal of the order dated 23.03.1999, also makes it evident that the resolution dated 28.06.1992 was passed in favour of Sri Udal Prasad and he was even granted salary on the post of Head Master with effect from 01.07.1992. 9. In the background of the aforesaid admitted facts, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the finding recorded in the impugned order to the effect that the petitioner continued to work as Assistant Clerk up to 16.08.2006, is apparently contrary to the evidence on record. 10. It is further submitted that the finding that the appointment of the petitioner on the post of Assistant Teacher (L.T. Grade) with effect from 20.07.1992 was erroneous, is also contrary to the evidence on record; and, in fact, contrary to the finding returned by this Court in Writ-A No. 27726 of 2018. 11. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondents Nos. 1 to 4 submits that on account of the retirement of Sri WRIA No. 7143 of 2024 3 Ishwar Prasad, Head Master on 30.06.1992, the said post fell vacant, against which Sri Udal Prasad, Assistant Teacher (L.T. Grade), was promoted as ad-hoc Head master; and on account of the said promotion, a short-term vacancy on the post of Assistant Teacher (L.T. Grade) was caused in the Institution, and the Committee of Management, without following the prescribed procedure, filled up the said ad-hoc vacancy by appointing the petitioner on 20.07.1992. 12. However, he has not disputed the fact that this Court, in its previous judgment in Writ-A No. 27726 of 2018, had examined the petitioner’s appointment and while referring to the order dated 06.03.2006 had recorded a finding that the petitioner had been lawfully appointed and, therefore, was entitled to payment of salary. It is also not the case of the respondents that the petitioner was not appointed against a permanent vacancy. 13. Since the entire impugned order dated 05.04.2024 has been passed on the premise that the petitioner had continued to work on the post of Assistant Clerk and was paid salary up to 16.08.2006, commensurate to the post of Assistant Clerk; therefore the presumption raised that he only discharged the service of an Assistant Teacher with effect from 17.08.2006, being absolutely erroneous; and in view of the fact that the vacancy existed as on 20.07.1992, for the post of Assistant Teacher and in the order dated 06.03.2006 also the said fact was acknowledged by the Additional Director of Education (Secondary), Uttar Pradesh, the very basis of the impugned order is faulty and at this stage it could not have been disputed that the petitioner was not working on the post of Assistant Teacher since 20.07.1992; and it was also not open to the concerned authorities to examine the validity of the appointment of the petitioner, which was made as long back as in the year 1992. 14. This Court is also of the opinion that the said issue was already settled by the observations made in the order dated 19.01.2024 passed in Writ No. 27726 of 2018 (Radhey Shyam Vishwakarma vs. State of U.P. and 5 others), as held herein above; and in such view of the fact, the impugned order dated 05.04.2024 cannot be sustained in the eyes of law and is accordingly set aside; with a direction upon the authorities to consider the regularization of the services of the petitioner on the post of Assistant Teacher (L.T. Grade), since his initial date of appointment that is WRIA No. 7143 of 2024 4 20.07.1992, on which post the petitioner worked till his date of retirement and as contemplated in the provisions of law, within a period of one month from the date of service of certified copy of this order; and thereafter pay the regular pension and all retirement benefits payable to the petitioner under the rules, further within a period of one month from the date of passing of the order, according consideration for regularizing the services of the petitioner on the post of Assistant Teacher (L.T. Grade), as directed herein above. 15. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands allowed. September 10, 2026 S.Prakash WRIA No. 7143 of 2024 5 (Siddharth Nandan,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHASHI PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad