Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:87218 Court No. - 38 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 43527 of 2017 Petitioner :- Gulab Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Krishna Mohan Asthana Counsel for Respondent :- Bipin Bihari Pandey,C.S.C.,Dharmendra Kumar Singh,Dinesh Kumar Maurya,Parmeshwar Kr. Chaudhary,Vivek Verma Hon'ble Donadi Ramesh,J. 1. Heard Sri Krishna Mohan Asthana, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Bipin Bihari Pandey, learned counsel for respondent nos. 4 & 5 and Sri Dharmendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for respondent no.6. 2. Present writ petition is filed questioning the order dated 3.8.2017 passed by Joint Director of Education, Varanasi Region, Varanasi and consequential order dated 8.8.2017 passed by District Inspector of Schools, Varanasi promoting respondent no.6 to the post of Lecturer (English). 3. Respondent no.4-Nagar Nigam, Varanasi is a local body running two institutions for boys namely, Nagar Nigam Uchhtar Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Machhodari, Varanasi and J.P. Mehta Nagar Nigam Inter College, Varanasi and the said institutions are governed by the provisions of U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 and Regulations framed thereunder. The petitioner was appointed as L.T. Grade teacher in the Nagar Nigam Uchhtar Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Machhodari, Varanasi on 02.05.2003 and respondent no. 6 was appointed as L.T. Grade teacher in J.P. Mehta Nagar Nigam Inter College, Varanasi on 19.07.2006. When substantive vacancy of Lecturer in English subject has arisen at J.P. Mehta Nagar Nigam Inter College, Varanasi due to retirement of permanent Lecturer (English), Sri Chhattu Ram. 4. As the said vacancy comes under the quota for promotees, the petitioner being the senior-most eligible teacher to be considered for promotion on the said post. Admittedly, the respondents have prepared a common seniority list in the year 2013-14, wherein the petitioner was placed at serial no. 10 and the sixth respondent was at serial no. 18. For filling up the promotional post, the respondents has to follow the Regulation 3-A. For the benefit of disposal of this case, the said provision is extracted below: "3-A (1) In case of an institution maintained by a local body, the seniority list as provided in Regulation 3 shall be drawn and maintained by the local body concerned. (2) Where the number of institutions, maintained by a local body, is more than one, a combined seniority list of Head of Institutions and another combined seniority list of teachers shall be maintained; such lists in case of institutions of boys and girls shall be maintained separately. (3) For preparing seniority list under sub-regulations (1) and (2) the provisions of Regulation 3 shall mutatis mutandis apply and reference to the Committee of Management in the said regulation and in the other regulations under Chapter II shall, in the case of institutions referred to in sub-regulation (1), be deemed to be reference to the concerned local body.]" 5. Procedure as contemplated under Section 14 of the U.P. Secondary Education Services Selection Board, Rules, 1998 prescribes the procedure to be followed for effecting promotions, is reads as below: "14. Procedure for recruitment by promotion.-(1) Where anyvacancy is to be filled by promotion all teachers working in trained graduates grade or Certificate of Teaching grade, if any, who possess the qualifications, prescribed for the post and have completed five years continuous regular service as such on the first day of the year of recruitment shall be considered for promotion to the lecturers grade or the trained graduates grade, as the case may be, without their having applied for the same. Notes-For the purposes of this sub-rule, regular service rendered in any other recognised institution shall be counted for eligibility, unless interrupted by removal, dismissal or reduction to a lower post. (2) The criterion for promotion shall be seniority subject to the rejection of unfit. (3) The Management shall prepare a list of teachers referred to in sub-rule (1), and forward it to the Inspector with a copy of seniority list, service records, including the character rolls, and a statement in the proforma given in Appendix 'A'. (4) Within three weeks of the receipt of the list from the management under sub-rule (3), the Inspector shall verify the facts from the record of his office and forward the list to the Joint Director. (5) The Joint Director shall consider the cases of the candidates on the basis of the records referred to in sub-rule (3) and may call such additional information as it may consider necessary, The Joint Director shall place the records before the Selection Committee referred to in sub- section (1) of Section 12 and after the committee's recommendation, shall forward the panel of selected candidates within one month to the Inspector with a copy thereof to the Management. (6) Within ten days of the receipt of the panel from the Joint Director under sub-rule (5), the Inspector shall send the name of the selected candidates to the Management of the institution which has notified the vacancy and the Management shall accordingly on authorisation under its resolution issue the appointment order in the proforma given in Appendix 'F' to the such candidate." 6. When the substantive vacancy arise and the same is meant for promotion as the senior-most eligible candidate for consideration to the said post, based on the seniority list prepared in the year 2013-14. Instead of considering the case of the petitioner under Regulation 3A (2) which prescribes maintaining of combined seniority list. It is also provided, the combined seniority list has to be prepared if two or more institutions are under the management i.e. the local body, common seniority list for boys and girls shall be made separately by the institutions. In the instant case, under the respondent-Management both the institutions pertaining to boys. Accordingly, they have prepared combined seniority list on 17.7.2014. 7. When such seniority list is existing and the same were not questioned or objected by any teacher, the respondents has to follow the same while filling up the substantive post, which fell vacant upon the retirement of Sri Chhattu Ram. But surprisingly contrary to the Regulation 3A, the respondents have considered the case of respondent no.6 by taking the single institution as a unit and considered the case of respondent no.6 for promotion. The said promotion was also approved by the respondent no.2 without considering the objection made by the petitioner. 8. In reply to the said contentions, learned counsel appearing for respondent no.6 has submitted that based on the assertions made in the counter affidavit. In fact, the respondents have considered the case of respondent no.6 based on the Government Order dated 13.6.1979, wherein it clarifies that promotion has to be effected based on the seniority of each institution and though two or more institutions under one management but the seniority list has to be prepared based on the institution. Accordingly, they have prepared the list and respondent no.6 who comes under the zone of consideration based on the qualification and seniority, her case has been considered for effecting promotion. In fact, a letter was also issued by U.P. Madhyamik Siksha Ayog, Allahabad as well as the Government Order dated 13.6.1979, the respondents have considered the case of respondent no.5 as she has worked in J.P. Mehta Nagar Nigam Inter College, Varanasi, where the vacancy is existing. Accordingly, the impugned promotion orders are in conformity with the Government Order dated 13.6.1979. Hence, requested to dismiss the writ petition. 9. Learned counsel for respondent no.4 has also relied on the very same Government Order for effecting promotion of respondent no.6. 10. In reply to the said contentions, learned counsel for the petitioner has once again relied on Regulation 3A and 3A (2) specifically prescribes a combined seniority list of teachers shall be maintained and for preparation of such combined seniority list mutatis mutandis apply. The said Regulation was inserted by an order dated 17.05.1983. In view of subsequent Regulation, the respondents ought not to have relied on the Government Order issued on 13.6.1979. The said Government Order superseded by virtue of insertion of Regulation 3A and the fact remains that the respondents have prepared the seniority list on 17.7.2014. The said seniority list has neither interfered by any court nor any objections have been filed by the teachers. The respondents cannot or ought not to rely on the Government Order dated 13.6.1979. In view of insertion of Regulation 3A, the impugned order has to be set aside and the respondents have to effect the promotion based on the combined seniority list, which was prepared on 17.7.2014. 11. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perusal of the record, the core issue involved in the matter is whether the Government Order dated 13.6.1979 or Regulation 3A should be followed. On considering both the provisions as the Government Order was issued in the year 1979, but by way of notification Regulation 3A was inserted on 17.05.1983, and it clearly stipulates to preparation of combined seniority list if two or more schools under one management. 12. In such circumstances, there is no hesitation to hold that the impugned orders are contrary to Regulation 3A(2) and accordingly, the said orders dated 3.8.2017 passed by Joint Director of Education, Varanasi Region, Varanasi and consequential order dated 8.8.2017 passed by District Inspector of Schools, Varanasi are set aside by remanding the matter to the respondents to re-visit the issue as per Regulation 3A(2) and also as per the combined seniority list prepared on 17.7.2014, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 13. Writ petition is, accordingly, allowed. Order Date :- 22.5.2025 Noman (Donadi Ramesh, J.) Digitally signed by :- NOMAN AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad