HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 19666 of 2019 Court No. - 52 HON'BLE MRS. MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J. 1. List is revised. None appears on behalf of the petitioners. 2. The matter is of the year 2019. 3. Heard Ms. Anuradha Sundaram, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondent nos.1 to 3 and perused the record. 4. The instant writ petition has been filed with the prayer to quash the impugned order dated 11.09.2019 passed by respondent no.4 and a further prayer to direct the respondents to allow the petitioner to fill the post in question. 5. Records show that in the petitioner's institution, which is imparting education from Class-VI to VIII and has been recognized under the provisions of U.P. Basic Education Act is also receiving grant-in-aid under the provisions of Act No.6 of Uttar Pradesh Junior High School (Payment of Salaries of Teachers and other Employees) Act, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as Act of 1978). There are 7 posts of Assistant Teachers, 1 Headmaster, 1 Clerk, 3 Class-IV Employees sanctioned in the Institution vide order dated 13.01.1987. The aforesaid posts including 1 Headmaster and 7 Assistant Teachers were appointed and were paid salary under the provisions of Act of 1978. Accordingly, all the aforesaid persons were being paid salary. Thereafter, some persons retired from their respective posts and the same were filled up, in accordance with law there being no dispute regarding their appointments. Three Assistant Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Yogesh Kumar Saxena Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Vikram Bahadur Singh C/M Kisan Majdoor Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Etawah, And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) Teachers have retired on account of superannuation in the year 2015, 2016 and 2017 but on account of ban by the State Government, the aforesaid three posts of Assistant Teacher could not be filled up. Thereafter, the petitioner sought permission for filling up the three vacant posts but respondent no.3 vide order dated 24.03.2018 denied the same and held that there are minimum sanctioned/prescribed posts i.e. 1 Headmaster and 4 Assistant Teachers which were to be filled upon the basis of the government circular. The aforesaid order dated 24.03.2018 was challenged by the petitioner by means of filing Writ-A No.10418 of 2018 (C/M Kisan Mazdoor Madhymik Vidyalaya Puraila And Another vs. State of U.P. And 2 Others) in which the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the competent authority to re-visit the issue, keeping in view the observations made in Writ Petition No.36910 of 2016 (C/M Dwivedi Mahadev Prasad Purva Madhyamik Vidyalaya vs. State of U.P. and others) as decided on 23.02.2018. 6. In compliance of the aforesaid, respondent no.3 has passed the impugned order dated 11.09.2019 by which the request for filling up the posts in question has been rejected on the basis of subsequent Government Order dated 25.01.2019 that too on the basis of sudden sudden inspection by the Khand Shiksha Adhikari. Records show that the aforesaid order has been challenged on the following grounds that the same is illegal as the Government Order dated 25.01.2019 is not applicable in the present case. The impugned order has been passed on the basis of sudden inspection by the Khand Shiksha Adhikari about which no information was given which is against the procedure provided under the relevant Government Order, therefore, based on such inspection, the impugned order cannot be sustain. 7. The reduction in the strength of the students cannot be a ground for reducing the sanctioned strength of teaching staff in the said Institution. Even if the strength of the students were found to be less, a proper procedure was to be followed to reduce the strength of teachers, in case required, therefore, the impugned order is said to be illegal, arbitrary and a prayer has been made to quash the same. WRIA No. 19666 of 2019 2 8. Despite service of notice upon respondent no.4 being sufficient, no counter affidavit has been filed on his behalf. Records further reveals that the petitioner has also not filed any rejoinder affidavit to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State. 9. Learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State submits that on account of coming up of Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (hereinafter referred to as Act of 2009) the appropriate amendments were made to the Act of 1978 by the 7th Amendment Rules and the ratio of Assistant was 35:1 and as the academic session 2020-21 of the Institution disclosed that the enrolled students were 32, 43 and 37 in Class VI, VII & VIII respectively, therefore, there was no occasion of granting permission for appointment of excess number of teachers. 10. In view of the aforesaid, the present petition is dismissed, accordingly. 11. There shall be no order as to costs. September 29, 2026 K.N. WRIA No. 19666 of 2019 3 (Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- KALP NATH SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad