Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:91155 Court No. - 38 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 43754 of 2000 Petitioner :- Lal Bahadur Yadav And Others Respondent :- D.I.O.S. Jaunpur And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- I.N. Singh,Anil Bhushan,I.R.Singh,Omprakash Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,A.K. Sinha Hon'ble Donadi Ramesh,J. 1. Heard Sri Anil Bhushan, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri P.K. Upadhyay, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents. 2. The present writ petition is filed questioning the orders dated 30.03.2000, 24.04.2000 and 31.07.2000 passed by the respondents. 3. Considering the merits of the case, this Court passed the following orders on 16.05.2002: "Sri A.K. Sinha, learned Advocate states that he will be filing an impleadment application on behalf of Devi Prasad Misra who is admittedly Ex-Manager. Sri Sinha submits that on the complaint of his client an enquiry was conducted and the impugned order adverse to the petitioner's interest has been passed. Be as it may, it is on filing of the impleadment application by Sri Sinha his locus standi will be considered by this court and appropriate decision will be taken after exchange of pleadings. Supplementary Affidavit has been filed in the writ petition, copy of which has been served on the learned Standing Counsel and on Sri A.K.Sinha learned Advocate. Learned counsel submits that although Director of Education while passing the impugned order on 30th March, 2000 has held that petitioner's appointment is against the sanctioned strength as he found that in the financial survey the post on which petitioners claims their appointment has not been found, but at the same time it has been pointed out that by Annexure-2 and 4 to the Supplementary Affidavit which is report of the educational authority as well as the authorities of the State Government it is clear the there was 44 sanctioned post and it has been said in the letter dated 19 October, 2001 that appointments are valid and therefore payment of salary should be ensured. In view of this although this court at this stage is not examining the merits in respect to the contention of either of the parties finally but at the same time in view of the facts as has been brought on the record by means of supplementary affidavit, I feel that the petitioners are entitle to get interim protection by this court, at this stage. In view of the aforesaid submission and in view of the further fact that at one point of time for few months petitioners were paid their salary, it is hereby directed as an interim measure that the respondents will ensure payment to the petitioners months by month till the next date. Issue notice to the respondent No. 4. Steps will be taken within ten days. List this matter in the 3rd week of August, 2002 alongwith record of Writ Petition No. 47278 of 99, showing the name of Sri A.K. Sinha as counsel for the respondent. By the next date the State authorities as well as private respondents may file counter affidavit." 4. By virtue of the said order, the petitioners are continuing and salaries were also being released. Subsequently, the petitioners have filed supplementary affidavit on 16.05.2002 wherein they have specifically contended that as against the impugned order, the sanctioned posts have been reduced from 44 to 23 posts. Hence, the Management approached the State Government. Thereafter, the State Government called for report from Joint Director of Education. In turn, Joint Director has instructed District Inspector of Schools to hold a detailed inquiry regarding the sanctioned posts. Pursuant to the same, District Inspector of Schools conducted inquiry and submitted report on 20.07.2001 holding that there are 44 sanctioned posts in the Institution. Further, it is also mentioned that appointment of the petitioners which were made by Committee of Management were not illegal and those appointments were made against the sanctioned posts. The said report is also annexed along with supplementary affidavit. Even after two decades, the respondents have not chosen to file any counter affidavit denying the said aspects of the case. 5. Considering the interim order passed by this Court and on perusal of the averments made in the supplementary affidavit, the impugned orders dated 30.03.2000, consequential orders dated 24.04.2000 and 31.07.2000 are set aside, remanding the matter to the 2nd respondent to consider the report submitted by DIOS dated 20.07.2001 and take appropriate action with regard to the sanctioned strength in the 4th respondent Institution. 6. As submitted by learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners that the petitioners are continuing based on the interim directions granted by this Court on 16.05.2002, hence the respondents shall allow the petitioners to continue till final orders are passed by the 2nd respondent based on the report submitted by the concerned authority. 7. Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 28.5.2025 rkg (Donadi Ramesh, J.) Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad