Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:90288 Court No. - 38 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 23931 of 2013 Petitioner :- C/M Lakhan Kishan Uchchatar Madhyamik Vidyapeet And Anr. Respondent :- State Of U.P.And 4 Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- S.S. Chauhan Counsel for Respondent :- A.K.Yadav Hon'ble Donadi Ramesh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The present writ petition is filed for the following reliefs: "I. that a writ of mandamus, order or direction in the nature of mandamus be issued directing the U.P. Selection Board to provide Principal and teachers in the Institution to maintain the education Session of the institution w.e.f. 01.07.2013. II. that a writ of mandamus, order or direction in the nature of mandamus be issued directing the respondents to permit the petitioner for making alternative arrangement by way of appointment of adhoc teachers in the Institution against the sanctioned strength and to pay them salary as admissible in law." 3. Considering the facts, this Court has passed the following orders on 30.04.2013 and 20.05.2013 respectively: "This is again one of those cases where the Committee of Management has come up explaining the current status of the employees of the institution and it is urged that by the end of the Session i.e. 30.6.2013, there will be only one Assistant Teacher available in the entire institution. Learned counsel submits that it is unimaginable to continue to run an institution with only one Teacher and it is in these circumstances that ad hoc arrangements should be allowed to be made by whatever mode chosen by the respondents inasmuch as no selection and appointment on permanent basis have either been made by the respondent - Board nor any effective steps have been taken. This issue has already been raised before this Court in which it has been noted that the State Government has not acquiesced to the request of empowering the Management to make ad hoc arrangements against sanctioned substantive posts. Consequently, this Court has again passed an order that the State Government may consider employing some other method under the control of the State Government for the purpose of making ad hoc appointments. The orders have been passed in Writ Petition No. 11071 of 2013 which has been fixed for 20.5.2013. Connect this writ petition with the aforesaid writ petition and it shall be listed accordingly. In the meantime, this order shall also be brought to the notice of the authorities as directed in the earlier two writ petitions for passing of an order. Let a certified copy of this order be issued to learned Standing Counsel for communicating it to the respondents." "These writ petitions relate to the same controversy that was raised in writ petition no. 11071 of 2013 where this court passed an order on 18.3.2013. Consequent to the said order a response was given by the respondents that a meeting was held on 18th April, 2013 at the level of the Secretary of the Secondary Education Department. It was resolved that it will not be appropriate to give any authority to the management to make ad-hoc appointments. Consequently, an order was passed in writ petition no. 22334 of 2013 on 24.4.2013 giving an alternative to the State Government to preserve the power of selection of ad-hoc appointment with the government officials itself and the matter was fixed for today to enable the State Government to take some other decision in the matter in view of the observations made in the said order. A third writ petition no. 23931 of 2013 was entertained which indicates the fact of availability of just one teacher in the institution and a prayer has been made that ad-hoc appointments should be made. Again a direction was issued on 30.4.2013 in the said writ petition calling upon the State Government to take some decision and inform the court in this regard. All these writ petitions have been taken up today and the learned Standing Counsel Sri A.K. Yadav has filed a counter affidavit in writ petition no. 23931 of 2013 which is taken on record. He However submits that one Mr. Kamran Rizvi has recently taken over charge as Secretary, Secondary Education, Government of U.P. and therefore he prays that in view of his recent joining some more breathing time may be given in order to enable him to inform the court as to what steps are being taken. He therefore submits that the matter be taken up on Monday so that he can inform the court about such instructions. List all these matters on Monday next. A copy of the order by tomorrow." 4. Controversy involved in this petition is that initially, considering the strength of the Institution, the authorities have sanctioned one Head Master, three L.T. Grade Teachers, three C.T. Grade Teachers, one B.T.C. Teacher, one Clerk and seven Class-IV employees. After increasing strength of the students, the Management has made repeated request for increasing of the sanctioned posts. Despite repeated request, the respondents have not considered the same and the respondents have not sanctioned the posts as per pupil teacher ratio. Hence the present petition. 5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has brought to the notice of the Court that though there are seven posts of teachers sanctioned but only five posts of teachers were filled up. The post of Principal and two posts of teachers are vacant. In view of the said circumstances, the Management has engaged three teachers and also sent proposal to the concerned authorities for release of the salary to the said teachers. 6. As the said request was also unattended by the authorities, considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners and without going into merits of the case, the present writ petition is disposed of by giving liberty to the petitioner to make afresh representation based on the strength of the students of the Institution for sanction of the additional posts to the concerned authorities within a period of four weeks. On receipt of such representation, the concerned authorities by conducting inquiry / inspection of the Institution and after obtaining report shall take appropriate decision with regard to sanctioning of the additional posts based on pupil teacher ratio within a period of three weeks thereafter. With regard to the vacant sanctioned posts, the petitioner is given liberty to make an application for filling up those posts to the concerned authorities within a period of two weeks. On receipt of such request, the concerned authorities may pass appropriate orders within a period of eight weeks thereafter. Order Date :- 27.5.2025 rkg (Donadi Ramesh, J.) Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad