Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:42108 Court No. - 5 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 7837 of 2025 Petitioner :- Ajeet Pratap Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Secondary Education Deptt. Lko. And 9 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajay Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents-State No.1 to 5, 9 & 10. Vakalatnama filed by Shri Onkar Singh, Advocate on behalf of respondents No.6 & 7 is taken on record. Vakalatnama filed by Shri Raj Kumar Mishra, Advocate on behalf of respondent No.8 is taken on record 3. Under challenge is the order dated 14.07.2025, a copy of which is Annexure-1 to the petition, whereby the respondent No.8 has been appointed as an officiating Principal. 4. Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that by means of the order dated 01.04.2025, a copy of which is Annexure-2 to the petition, the petitioner had been appointed as the officiating Principal and subsequent thereto by means of the impugned order, the respondent No.8 has been appointed. 5. Grounds raised to challenge the impugned order are (a) that it is a stigmatic order; and (b) that the order has not been passed by the Committee of Management. 6. No other ground has been urged. 7. Responding Shri Onkar Singh, learned counsel appearing for respondents No.6 & 7 and Shri Raj Kumar Mishra, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.8 state that the appointment of the officiating Principal has to be made on the basis of seniority. Placing reliance on the seniority which has been passed on to the Court, it is indicated that respondent no.8 is working in the Lecturer grade and his name finds place at Serial No.5 in the seniority vis a vis name of the petitioner who is working as Assistant Teacher, finds place at Serial No.17. 8. It is contended that it is in fact respondent No.8 who is senior to the petitioner as such the respondents have not erred in giving the charge of officiating principal to the respondent No.8. 9. So far as the ground (b) i.e. the order impugned has not been passed by the Committee of Management is concerned, again reliance has been placed on the resolution of the Committee of Management dated 11.07.2025 for the purpose of giving charge to the post of officiating Principal to respondent No.8. 10. It has also been indicated that the order impugned is not stigmatic rather it is an order simpliciter giving the charge of the officiating Principal to the respondent No.8. 11. Considering the aforesaid, this Court does not find any reason to interfere with the order impugned. The writ petition stands dismissed. Order Date :- 23.7.2025 prateek Digitally signed by :- PRATEEK ARORA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench