Vineet Saran, J. - (1.)By means of this writ petition, the petitioners have challenged the orders dated 18.9.1995 and 29.6.1996 passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Varanasi whereby approval has been granted to the appointment of the respondent No. 5 as a teacher and a direction has been made to make payment of salary to the respondent No. 5.
(2.)Brief facts of this case are that on the retirement of a Head Master of the institution, the senior most L.T. Grade teacher was promoted as ad hoc Head Master. Consequently, a short-term vacancy occurred for which, according to the case of the respondents, an advertisement was issued on 30.11.1993 in the Hindi daily "Sanmarg" and pursuant thereto, the applications were to be submitted by 15.12.1993 and thereafter the selection is said to have taken place. By resolution dated 22.12.1993 the respondent No. 5, Om Prakash Pandey was to be given appointment. It has been stated that on the same day i.e. 22.12.1993 the papers were sent to the District Inspector of Schools for grant of approval. On the basis of such appointment letter, the respondent No. 5 is said to have joined the institution on 27.12.1993. When the respondent No. 5 was not paid his salary, he filed Civil Suit No. 276 of 1995 in the Court of the Civil Judge, Varanasi with the prayer for a direction to the defendants therein (namely the Committee of Management as well as the District Inspector of Schools) to make payment of salary on the post of L.T. grade teacher regularly month by month. Then on 7.7.1995 the respondent No. 5 filed Writ Petition No. 18099 of 1995 with the same prayer as had been made in the civil suit which was for payment of salary to the petitioner therein (respondent No. 5 herein) on the post of Assistant Teacher in L.T. Grade, alongwith arrears. The said writ petition was disposed of at the admission stage itself without calling for a counter affidavit, with a direction to the District Inspector of Schools to decide the representation of the petitioner therein with regard to payment of salary. It was after the passing of the aforesaid order in the writ petition, that on 22.7.1995 the respondent No. 5, Om Prakash Pandey got Civil Suit No. 276 of 1995 dismissed as withdrawn. Then by the impugned order dated 18.9.1995 passed by the District Inspector of Schools approval was granted to the appointment of the respondent No. 5 and it was stated that he shall also be entitled to payment of salary after such directions are issued from the Directorate of Education. Thereafter by order dated 29.6.1996 the District Inspector of Schools directed for payment of salary to the respondent No. 5. Aggrieved by the aforesaid orders, this writ petition has been filed.
(3.)I have heard Sri I.R. Singh, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State-respondents, Sri S.D. Ojha, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent No. 4 and Sri D.S.M. Tripathi, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent No. 5 and have perused the record.