- (1.)Petitioner had been performing and discharging duties as Lecturer in English at Lakhori Inter College, Lakhori, Moradabad, which is duly recognized institution under the provisions of U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921. Petitioner has contended that ignoring his seniority, one Rajpal was appointed as Principal of the said institution, and as such there were strained relations with the Management, in this background, petitioner requested to attach him to some other college, so that no untoward incident may take place. Petitioner has contended that on 19.03.2002 on the consent of the Management of Lakhori Inter College as well as Authorized Controller of Shankar Bhushan Sharan Inter College, Moradabad, petitioner was attached to Shankar Bhushan Sharan Inter College, Moradabad, on the condition that during period of attachment , he shallbe paid his salary from Lakhori Inter College. Thereafter, Regional Joint Director of Education passed an order on 04.07.2003 extending the attachment period on same terms and conditions, until further orders. Petitioner has contended that post of English Lecturer fell vacant at Brij Ratan Arya Kannya Inter College, Moradabad, on account of promotion of English Lecturer as Principal. Petitioner has contended that he applied for his attachment at the said institution and request was also made by the Administrator of the institution also, in this regard. Petitioner has contended that thereafter, matter was examined on 20.01.2006 and the petitioner was attached to Brij Ratan Arya Kannya Inter College, Moradabad by partially modifying the earlier order of attachment on the same terms and conditions. Thereafter, order has been passed on 12.04.2007 by Joint Director of Education canceling the said attachment and asking the petitioner to go to his parent institution i.e. Lakhori Inter College, Lakhori, Moradabad. At this juncture, present writ petition has been filed.
(2.)Sri S.M.A. Naqvi, Advocate, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, contended with vehemence that circumstances, under which petitioner was attached to another institution has yet not changed, as such revocation of attachment order is illegal.
(3.)Learned Standing Counsel, Sri K.K. Chand, on the other hand contended that there is no provision of attachment as has been sought to be done in the present case, and as attachment was void, as such revocation of the same does not infringe any right of the petitioner.