# C/M, N.A.S. Inter College Meerut and another v. State of U.P. and others

- **Citation:** (2012) 2 ILRA 791
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2012-05-23
- **Case number:** Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 59814 of 2008
- **Bench:** B. Amit Sthalekar
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/c-m-n-a-s-inter-college-meerut-and-another-v-state-of-u-p-and-others-42157
- **Pages:** 6

## Headnote

Constitution
of
India,
Article
226selection of Principal-Inter college aided
institution-vacancy of principal notified
1995-penal
of
selected
candidate
prepared
on
15.04.1997-by
G.O.
17.04.1997 implementation of select list
stayed considering pending SLP before
Supreme
Court-ultimately
validity
of
provision
of
Section
9,
10,
11of
Commission
Act
1984
upheld-senior
most selected candidate refused to joinDIOS posted R-4 being place at serial no.
2-challenge made on ground life of
select list exhausted after one year on
refusal of topmost in merit list-held-
after joining on resignation or death
such plea available but where topmost in
merit not joined-list still holds goodpetition dismissed.

Held: Para 15

In my opinion, since the select list of
1997 still holds good on the non-joining
of candidate at serial No. 1 of the said
792 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2012
select list, as held by the Division Bench
of this Court in the case of Chandresh
Nath Singh Baghel (supra) the right of
the respondent No. 4 to seek his
appointment on the post of Principal in
the N.A.S. Inter College cannot be
defeated, solely on the ground that he
had in the mean time join the Nehru
Smarak Inter College, Kurali, Meerut.
Case law discussed:
2008 (1) ESC 428 (All) (DB)

## Text

2 All] C/M, N.A.S. Inter College Meerut and another V. State of U.P. and others
791
petitioner is man of criminal mentality is
based on no material on record.

18. It is well settled that mere fact
that some reports had been lodged
against the petitioner would not establish
the "necessary connection with security
of the public peace or public safety".
Therefore, in view of the settled law
unless there is some other report or
material, only initiation of the criminal
cases against the petitioner cannot be a
ground to sustain the order of revocation
of arms licence.

19. Petitioner has made out a case
for setting aside the order of cancelling
his firearm licence as well as order of
appellate authority. The order dated
6.2.2009
passed
by
the
District
Magistrate, Mau and order of the
Commissioner,
Azamgarh
Division,
Azamgarh dated 3.9.2008 are hereby
quashed .

20. The writ petition is allowed.

21. However, the Court is not
aware of the fact whether the petitioner
has been involved thereafter in any other
criminal activities or that he is desirable
or a fit person to be allowed to possess
the firearms.

22. For the aforesaid reason , the
District Magistrate, Mau will consider
the matter afresh in the light of Section
14 of the Arms Act 1959 and consider
the conduct of the petitioner subsequent
to the year 2009 and pass a fresh order as
regards to the firearm licence to be held
by the petitioner within three months
from the date a certified copy of this
order is produced before him.

23. The release of the firearms of
the petitioner shall depend upon the fresh
order to be passed by the District
Magistrate /Licencing Authority.
---------
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 23.05.2012

BEFORE
THE HON'BLE B. AMIT STHALEKAR, J.

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 59814 of 2008

C/M, N.A.S. Inter College Meerut &
another

 ...Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. & others
 ...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner:
Sri Nitin Sharma

Counsel for the Respondents:
C.S.C.
Sri V.K.Singh

Constitution
of
India,
Article
226selection of Principal-Inter college aided
institution-vacancy of principal notified
1995-penal
of
selected
candidate
prepared
on
15.04.1997-by
G.O.
17.04.1997 implementation of select list
stayed considering pending SLP before
Supreme
Court-ultimately
validity
of
provision
of
Section
9,
10,
11of
Commission
Act
1984
upheld-senior
most selected candidate refused to joinDIOS posted R-4 being place at serial no.
2-challenge made on ground life of
select list exhausted after one year on
refusal of topmost in merit list-held-
after joining on resignation or death
such plea available but where topmost in
merit not joined-list still holds goodpetition dismissed.

Held: Para 15

In my opinion, since the select list of
1997 still holds good on the non-joining
of candidate at serial No. 1 of the said
792 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2012
select list, as held by the Division Bench
of this Court in the case of Chandresh
Nath Singh Baghel (supra) the right of
the respondent No. 4 to seek his
appointment on the post of Principal in
the N.A.S. Inter College cannot be
defeated, solely on the ground that he
had in the mean time join the Nehru
Smarak Inter College, Kurali, Meerut.
Case law discussed:
2008 (1) ESC 428 (All) (DB)

(Delivered by Hon'ble B. Amit Sthalekar, J.)

1. This writ petition has been filed
by the petitioner challenging the orders
dated
8.09.2008,
3.10.2008
and
23.10.2008
and
seeking
a
further
direction commanding the respondents
not to appoint the respondent No. 4 as
Principal of the petitioner-Institution.

2. The facts of the case in brief are
that there is an Institution known as
Nanak Chand Anglo Sanskrit Inter
College, Meerut (the Institution). The
said Institution is recognized and is also
receiving grant-in-aid. It is governed by
the provisions of U.P. Intermediate
Education
Act,
1921
and
the
Regulations framed thereunder as also
the U.P. Secondary Education Services
Selection Board Act, 1982. A post of
Principal fell vacant in 1995 and a
requisition for selection to the said post
was forwarded by the Committee of
Management to the Selection Board
under the Act, 1982. Pending selection a
senior most Lecturer was appointed as
officiating Principal till the candidate
selected by the Selection Board would
join. After the interview, a panel of
selected candidates was prepared on
15.04.1997.
In
the
meantime
the
constitutional validity of Sections 9,10
and 11 of the U.P. Secondary Education
Commission Act, 1982 was challenged
and therefore, the State Government
issued a notification on 17.04.1997
staying the implementation of the select
list. Ultimately, the vires of the Act
1982 were upheld by the Supreme
Court.

3. The contention of the petitioner,
Committee of Management is that the
candidate at serial No. 1 of the select
list, one Sri Syed Hussain Asgar Kazmi
was directed to report to the institution
and submitted his joining but Sri Kazmi
did not join the institution. Accordingly,
the respondent No. 4 who was the
second candidate in the select list was
directed to submit his joining in the
institution.
The
contention
of
the
petitioner is two-fold, one that once the
candidate at serial No. 1 of the select
list had declined to join the institution,
the select list came to an end and
thereafter, there was no further scope
for directing the candidate at serial No.
2 namely, the respondent No. 4 to join
the institution. The second contention of
the petitioner is that as per the proviso
to sub rule 5(a) of Rule 12 of the U.P.
Secondary
Education
Services
Commission Rules, 1995, no candidates
shall be allocated the institution of his
home district.

4. I have heard Sri Nitin Sharma,
learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner, Sri Vinod Kumar Singh,
learned
counsel
appearing
for
respondent No. 4 and the learned
standing
counsel
appearing
for
respondent Nos. 1,2 and 3. The order is
being dictated in open Court.

5. The submission of the learned
counsel for the petitioner is that once a
2 All] C/M, N.A.S. Inter College Meerut and another V. State of U.P. and others
793
candidate at serial No. 1 of the select
list had declined to join the institution in
question, the select list would cease to
operate and therefore, no direction could
have been given by the DIOS, Meerut to
the respondent No. 4 to submit his
joining in the said institution. Rebutting
the submission of the learned counsel
for the petitioner. Sri Vinod Kumar
Singh appearing for respondent No. 4
has relied upon the decision of a
Division Bench of this Court reported in
2008(1)ESC 428 (All) (DB), Chandresh
Nath Singh Baghel Vs. Bhagwan
Singh Sisodia and others. He has in
particular drawn the attention of the
Court to Para 7 of the said judgment
wherein the issues for consideration of
the Court have been outlined. Para 7
reads as follows:

"The
issues
for
consideration
before this Court in the present Special
Appeal are allowed as follows:

"(a) Whether the select panel
notified under the provisions of the Act
exhausts itself with the appointment of
the candidate empanelled at serial No.
1.

(b)
Whether
the
candidate
empanelled at serial No. 2 of the said
panel can be offered appointment in
case the person at serial No. 1 after
joining, retires, resigns or expires
within the valid period of the select
panel, which under the Rules is one
year.

(c) Whether select panel in respect
of an earlier vacancy can be used for
filling up of the subsequent vacancy
because
of
death,
resignation
or
retirement of the earlier incumbent or
such
vacancy
is
required
to
be
advertised afresh so as to make the
process of selection in conformity with
Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of
India."

In Para 21 of the said judgment, the
Division Bench has further held as
follows:

"So far as the life of select panel is
concerned as provided for, under the
U.P. Commission Rules, suffice it to
point out that the said valid select list is
only for the purpose of offering
appointment to the candidates in order
of merit only if the person higher in
merit does not join the post and once
the empanelled candidate joins in
accordance
with
his
merit,
the
remaining select panel would exhausts
itself automatically and the remaining
panel could cannot be said to have a life
beyond the purpose for which it was
prepared, therefore, no shelter can be
taken by a person in the select
list/waiting list behind the provision
which prescribes the life of the select
panel as one year."

6. Thus what has been held by the
Division Bench is that the life of a
select list comes to an end when a
candidate at serial No. 1 joins and after
joining retires/resigns or expires within
a valid period of the select panel which
under the rules is one year. However in
Para 21, the Court has held that the
valid
select
list
under
the
U.P.
Commission Rules is only for purpose
of
offering
appointments
to
the
candidates in order of merit, only if, the
person higher in merit does not join the
post and once the empanelled candidate
joins the post in accordance with his
794 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2012
merit, the remaining select panel would
exhaust itself automatically and the
remaining panel cannot be said to have
a life beyond the purpose for which it
was prepared.
0.00"

7. In the present case, the admitted
facts are that the candidate at serial No.
1 of the select list, namely, Sri Syed
Hussain Asgar Kazmi did not join on
the post of Principal in the institution in
question. Therefore, the submission of
the learned counsel for the petitioner
that the life of the select list would
come to an end and the select list would
exhaust itself, does not hold water.

8. Sri Nitin Sharma further
submitted that after the select panel of
the year 1997, two more select panels
have
been
declared
by
the
U.P.
Secondary
Education
Services
Commission and, therefore, it cannot be
said that the panel of 1997 will alive.
This submission of the learned counsel
also does not hold water in view of the
law laid down in the case of Chandresh
Nath Singh Baghel (supra) when applied
to the facts of the present case. Since
the candidate at serial No. 1 had not
joined, it could not be said that the
select list has exhausted itself and that
no directions could be given to the
respondent No. 4 to join the institution.

9.
 The second leg
of the
submission of Sri Nitin Sharma is that
the respondent No. 4 belonged to the
home district of Meerut in which N.A.S.
Inter College is situated and therefore,
in terms of the proviso to sub rule 5(a)
of Rule 12 of the U.P. Secondary
Education Services Commission Rules,
1995, he was not eligible to be
appointed as Principal in the N.A.S.
Inter College, Meerut. In support of his
submission Sri Sharma has placed
reliance upon the documents filed as
Annexure III to the writ petition
wherein at page 21 of the writ petition
at serial No. 3 after the name of
respondent No. 4 it is mentioned as
"Prantiya Upadhyaksha", Uttar Pradesh
Madhyamik Sikshak Sangh, Meerut. He
has also drawn attention of the Court to
the document filed as Annexure VI at
page 30 of the writ petition where the
address of the respondent No. 4 has
been shown as " dwara Sri Bhagwan
Sharma, 158 Kailashpuri, Meerut".

10.

Rebutting
the
second
submission Sri Vinod Kumar Singh,
learned counsel for respondent No. 4
has drawn attention of the Court to the
document filed as Annexure V (CA-5),
service book of respondent No. 4. This
is the photocopy of the first page of the
service book of the petitioner wherein
the address of the respondent No. 4 has
been shown as "Village-Achchhaija Post
Hapur District Ghaziabad". He also
relied upon a subsequent document
which is at page 30 of the counter
affidavit which is a certificate issued by
SDM, Hapur District Ghaziabad, which
also verifies that the respondent No. 4 is
ordinarily
a
resident
of
VillageAchchhaija
Post
Hapur
District
Ghaziabad.

11. From a perusal of the
documents which have been filed by the
petitioner as well as by the respondent
No. 4 to show the residence of
respondent No. 4, from the documents
at page 29 and page 30 of the counter
affidavit, there is absolutely no doubt
that the home district of respondent No.
4 is district Ghaziabad (now district
2 All] C/M, N.A.S. Inter College Meerut and another V. State of U.P. and others
795
Hapur)
Village-Achchhaija.
In
fact
document on page 29 of the counter
affidavit is a photocopy of the page of
the service book of the petitioner which
also mentions the home district of
respondent No. 4 to be VillageAchchhaija, Tehsil Hapur (now district
Hapur)
District
Ghaziabad.
The
document filed at page 21 of the writ
petition does not mention the address of
the respondent No. 4. It only states that
the respondent No. 4 is the "Prantiya
Upadhyaksha" of the Uttar Pradesh
Madhyamik Shikshak Sangh, Meerut.
The document at page 30 also after the
name of respondent No. 4 mentions his
address as " dwara Sri Bhagwan
Sharma,
158
Kailashpuri,
Meerut"
which translates as C/o Sri Bhagwan
Sharma, 158, Kailashpuri, Meerut. It is
not disputed between the parties that
prior to his selection for the post of
Principal, the respondent No. 4 was
working as Assistant Teacher in the
institution at Meerut and therefore, it is
obvious that he would have some
residential address in Meerut but that
would not itself would lead to any
inference that Meerut is the home
district of the respondent No. 4.

12. The term "home district" has
not been defined any where, either in
the U.P. Intermediate Education Act,
1921
or
the
Regulations
framed
thereunder or under the U.P. Secondary
Education Services Selection Board Act,
1982 or the Rules 1995 but in common
parlance "home district" would mean
the place of permanent resident of the
individual irrespective of where he may
be settled for the purposes of his job or
other vocation.

13. In view of the foregoing
discussions, I find no merit in the writ
petition.

14. It is further contended by Sri
Nitin Sharma that during the period
when the matter was pending before the
Court, the respondent No. 4 had joined
another
institution
namely,
Nehru
Smarak Inter College, Kurali, Meerut in
the year 2009 as a permanent Principal
selected through the Commission. Sri
Vinod Kumar Singh, however, seriously
disputed this fact and he submits that
though the respondent No. 4 joined the
Nehru Smarak Inter College, Kurali,
Meerut in the year 2009, he has been
placed under probation and even after
the expiry of two years his probation
has been extended further on the ground
that the matter regarding his posting in
the N.A.S. Inter College is still sub
judice before the Court. He therefore,
submits
that
his
right
to
seek
appointment on the post of Principal in
the N.A.S. Inter College, Meerut flows
from the validity of the life of select list
of 1997 and that right cannot be
obliterated by his subsequent joining in
the Nehru Smarak Inter College, Kurali,
Meerut which he joined only for
purposes of his livelihood.

15. In my opinion, since the select
list of 1997 still holds good on the nonjoining of candidate at serial No. 1 of
the said select list, as held by the
Division Bench of this Court in the case
of Chandresh Nath Singh Baghel (supra)
the right of the respondent No. 4 to seek
his appointment on the post of Principal
in the N.A.S. Inter College cannot be
defeated, solely on the ground that he
had in the mean time join the Nehru
Smarak Inter College, Kurali, Meerut.
796 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2012

16. In view of the foregoing
discussions and the law laid down by
Division Bench of this Court, in my
opinion, the present writ petition is
devoid of merit and deserves to be
dismissed. It is, accordingly, dismissed.
----------