2025:AHC:72161 Reserved :- 29/04/2025 Delivered :- 06/05/2025 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4049 of 2018 Petitioner :- Dinesh Kumar Sharma Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Ors Counsel for Petitioner :- Anand Kumar Singh,Ashish Kumar Ojha,Niraj Kumar Singh,Pankaj Roy Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Hritudhwaj Pratap Sahi,Nisheeth Yadav,Ratnakar Upadhyay,Salilendu Kumar Upadhyay,Sankalp Narain Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J. 1. Heard Sri R.K. Ojha, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Ashish Kumar Ojha, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri V.K. Singh, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Avnish Kumar Rai and Sri Kamlesh Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for respondents. 2. It is no longer res-integra that if a Junior High School is upgraded to High School or Intermediate College, provisions of U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 would be applicable and provisions of U.P. Basic Education Act, 1972 would not be applicable and, therefore, in such upgraded schools/colleges, appointment of Teachers or Principal would be made in accordance with relevant applicable provisions. 3. Aforesaid position of law is not disputed by learned Senior Advocate appearing for petitioner. 4. In support of petitioner’s case, learned Senior Advocate has submitted that due to a fact that Junior High School and upgraded High School/Intermediate College were running separately having independent status and having independent Principal also, therefore, he has supported selection process whereby petitioner was appointed as Principal in terms of U.P. Basic Education Act, 1972 and that it was later on erroneously cancelled by the impugned order. 5. Learned Senior Advocate appearing for petitioner, in support of his submissions, has referred some documents annexed along with this writ petition that Principal of said Junior High Schools is issuing Transfer Certificates (T.C.) after Class-VIII. 6. Sri Kamal Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for respondents has supported above submissions, however, he has further submitted that recognition for concerned High School and Intermediate college has recently been withdrawn by an order dated 01.08.2023. 7. Learned Senior Advocate appearing for respondent-7 has opposed above submissions and placed reliance on a judgment passed by Division Bench of this Court in Rupendra Singh vs. Om Prakash and 5 others, Special Appeal No. 890/2014 decided on 28.11.2016 and for reference, relevant paragraph of said judgment is quoted below :- “The legal position as on date stands clarified that as far as the provision, contained under Section 7-A(a) of U.P. No. II of 1921 is concerned, the recognition/promotion accorded under Section 7-A(a) is to be accorded to the institution which is already recognized 2 institution within the meaning of Section 2(b) of 1921 Act and this is also accepted position that recognition to Junior High School as High School is to be granted in accordance with the provisions of Section 7(4) of 1921 Act. This is also accepted position that the State is fully empowered to grant recognition under Section 7(4) or Section 7AA without finance and after an institution is granted recognition for the first time as a High School, minimum necessary post of teachers and Head Master is contemplated to be created even though without finance so as to fill up those posts in accordance with 1921 and 1982 Act. The said directions given by the coordinate Bench are binding on us and we also fully subscribe to the said view in question. On these parameters, we proceed to mention that it would be true that in the present case, the institution in question wherein petitioner had been performing and discharging his duties has been a Junior High School and this is also accepted position that the institution in question has been upgraded from Junior High School to High School, as the institution in question has been granted recognition for imparting instructions in High School under the scheme of things provided for. Once a Junior High School is to be granted recognition as a High School, then it has to be in consonance with the provisions as contained in Section 7(4) of the 1921 Act. We also clarify at this stage that at the point of time when recognition has been accorded to the institution in question, it may be true that the section that has been quoted therein is one under Section 7A (a) of U.P. Act No. II of 1921 and Section 7A (a) is attracted in reference of institution that are already recognized 3 institutions within the meaning of Section 2(b) of 1921 Act, then even if a wrong provision has been mentioned therein, the said recognition has to be accepted as an institution accorded recognition in consonance with the provisions as contained in Section 7(4) of the Act.” 8. I have considered above submissions and perused the records. 9. As referred above, position of law is very clear that if a Junior High School is upgraded to High School or Intermediate, provisions of Act, 1921 would only be applicable. 10. In order to consider submissions of learned Senior Advocate appearing for petitioner, Court takes note of first order of upgradation dated 17.08.1994 and that it was addressed to Manager, Surya Narayan Purva Madhyamik Vidyalay, Pindra, Varanasi i.e. a Junior High School, which clearly indicates that said school was first upgraded to High School and later on upgraded to Intermediate also and thereafter it was named as Sri Surya Narayan Inter College, Pindara, Varanasi. 11. Therefore, only on basis of a document that some transfer certificates were issued would not belie the aforesaid letter dated 17.08.1994 as well as similar other letters. No other document is placed on record that Junior High School and upgraded High School and Intermediate college was running separately at a same place or at different places. 4 12. In view of above, this Court does not find any illegality in impugned order. Otherwise also, now appointment of Principal is to be carried out in terms of U.P. Education Service Selection Commission Act, 2023. 13. In above background, Court also takes note of judgment of Rupendra Singh (supra) which is also against the submissions of learned Senior Advocate appearing for petitioner. 14. In view of above discussion, present writ petition lacks merit, hence, dismissed. Order Date :- May 06, 2025 Sinha_N. [Saurabh Shyam Shamshery, J.] 5 Digitally signed by :- NIRMAL SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad