# Cases 645, L. Robert D' Souza v. Executive Engineer, Southern Railway

- **Citation:** (2002) 3 ILRA 663
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2002-08-27
- **Case number:** Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 474 of 1988
- **Bench:** Rakesh Tiwari
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/cases-645-l-robert-d-souza-v-executive-engineer-southern-railway-39937
- **Pages:** 3

## Headnote

Act-
Promotion to L.T. Grade and Lecturer
Grade- G.O. declaring CT grade as Dying
Cadre on completion of 10 years service
in CT grade and the teacher becomes
entitled to automatic promotion in LT
grade.

(para 9)

Petr even though qualified for promotion
to
lecturer
grade,
but
not
being
promoted by DIOS, direction issued to
DIOS to give approval for promotion of
the petitioner. A counter affidavit has
also been filed on behalf of DIOS,
Allahabad, in which it has been stated
that
there
is
no
doubt
that
the
Management has power to promote the
petitioner which does not have any
concern with the DIOS. There is no
denial in the counter affidavit that the
post of Lecturer is to be filled only by
way of promotion and the petitioner is
only a qualified teacher to be promoted
in Lecturer grade.

In view of the facts stated above, the
writ petition succeeds and is allowed.
The District Inspector of Schools is
directed to pass appropriate orders on
the papers in respect of the petitioner
sent
to
him
for
approval
of
the
promotion of the petitioner in pursuance
of the resolution on of the committee of
management
dated
15.7.95
recommending the promotion of the
petitioner in Lecturer grade, within a
period of two months from the date of
production of a certified copy of this
order. No order as to costs.

## Text

http://www.allahabadhighcourt.nic.in
3 All] State of U.P. V. The Labour Court, Allahabad and another
663
Mirzapur. Therefore, it is not a case of
retrenchment.

4. So far as the cessation/
abandonment law relating retrenchment is
concerned, it is clear from a series of
decisions of the Apex Court as well as
this
Court
that
cessation
of
an
employment
for
whatsoever
reason
amounts to retrenchment and the least that
is required from the employer is to
comply with the provisions of section 6-N
of the Act (see: (1982) 1 Supreme Court
Cases 645, L. Robert D' Souza Vs.
Executive Engineer, Southern Railway
and another).

5. In view of the law aforesaid laid
down by the Apex Court the action of the
petitioner in not paying the wages to the
respondent No.2- workman amounts to
retrenchment. Thus the Reference has
been rightly answered in favour of the
workman by the Labour Court. The
Award does not require any direction
from
this
Court.
With
the
above
directions, the writ petition is dismissed.
---------
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 27.08.2002

BEFORE
THE HON'BLE RAKESH TIWARI, J.

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 474 of 1988

Iqbal Ahmad, Assistant Teacher

 ...Petitioner
Versus
District Inspector of Schools, Allahabad
and another

 ...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner:
Sri Prakash Gupta
Counsel for the Respondents:
S.C.
U.P.
Intermediate
Education
Act-
Promotion to L.T. Grade and Lecturer
Grade- G.O. declaring CT grade as Dying
Cadre on completion of 10 years service
in CT grade and the teacher becomes
entitled to automatic promotion in LT
grade.

(para 9)

Petr even though qualified for promotion
to
lecturer
grade,
but
not
being
promoted by DIOS, direction issued to
DIOS to give approval for promotion of
the petitioner. A counter affidavit has
also been filed on behalf of DIOS,
Allahabad, in which it has been stated
that
there
is
no
doubt
that
the
Management has power to promote the
petitioner which does not have any
concern with the DIOS. There is no
denial in the counter affidavit that the
post of Lecturer is to be filled only by
way of promotion and the petitioner is
only a qualified teacher to be promoted
in Lecturer grade.

In view of the facts stated above, the
writ petition succeeds and is allowed.
The District Inspector of Schools is
directed to pass appropriate orders on
the papers in respect of the petitioner
sent
to
him
for
approval
of
the
promotion of the petitioner in pursuance
of the resolution on of the committee of
management
dated
15.7.95
recommending the promotion of the
petitioner in Lecturer grade, within a
period of two months from the date of
production of a certified copy of this
order. No order as to costs.

(Delivered by Hon'ble Rakesh Tiwari, J.)

1. Heard the learned counsel for the
petitioner and the learned Standing
Counsel and perused the records.

2. Majidia Islamia Inter College,
Allahabad (herein after called as the
Institution). It is a minority institution and
http://www.allahabadhighcourt.nic.in
664 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2002
is recognized under the U.P. Intermediate
Education Act.

3. The petitioner was appointed in
C.T. grade in the Institution on 17.7.1972
for teaching English subject. One Noor
Ahmad Khan L.T. grade teacher, who was
teaching the same subject to High School
classes, went on long leave and thereafter
resigned from his post in the year 1977.

4. Under Regulation 6 of Chapter-II
of the Regulations framed under U.P.
Intermediate Education Act, a teacher,
who is working in C.T. grade and having
put in five years continuous substantive
service,
is
entitled
for
promotion,
provided
he
possesses
prescribed
minimum qualification for teaching the
subjects required in L.T. grade.

5. The qualification for teaching
English as a subject in High School
classes is that the teacher should be
trained and possesses Bachelor of Arts
degree with English Literature as a
subject. It is alleged that the petitioner is a
trained teacher and B.A. with English
Literature,
History,
Economic
and
General English as subjects and as such
he is fully qualified for being promoted in
L.T. grade teacher under Regulation 6 of
the Regulations in clear vacancy, which
had occurred on account of resignation of
permanent incumbent Noor Ahmad in the
year 1977.

6. It is submitted that papers of the
petitioner were sent for approval of his
appointment in L.T. grade to the D.I.O.S.
in the month of July, 1977, but the
approval was not granted on the pretext
that the Institution was not having
requisite strength of students. However,
the petitioner was continued by the
Management to teach High School classes
in English subject.

7. In the mean time, one Ale Ahmad
Abdi, who was also a permanent L.T.
grade teacher and was teaching English in
High School classes, was promoted on the
post of Lecturer in the year 1982 causing
a substantive vacancy in L.T. grade.

8. The grievance of the petitioner by
means of the present writ petition is that
though he was entitled for promotion in
L.T. grade, but due to delay in the matter
by the respondents, he has been deprived
of the promotion. The petitioner filed the
present writ petition for a direction in the
nature
of
mandamus
directing
the
respondents to promote the petitioner in
L.T. grade. The writ petition was admitted
and notices were issued to the respondents
on 7th September, 1988.

9. During the pendency of the writ
petition, a Government Order was issued
in the year 1989 by which C.T. grade was
declared as dying cadre and it was
provided in the G.O. that on completion
of ten years service in C.T. grade, a
teacher
will
become
entitled
for
promotion in L.T. grade automatically. In
view of the G.O. dated 3.2.89 this Court
by an interim order dated 3.2.89 directed
the Management of the Institution to pay
the salary to the petitioner in L.T. grade
with effect from 1982. The interim order
dated 3.2.89 is quoted below:

"In respect of the fact that time was
granted to the respondents to file a
counter affidavit. No counter affidavit has
been filed till this date.

The respondents are directed to pay
to the petitioner the salary of L.T. grade
http://www.allahabadhighcourt.nic.in
3 All] Iqbal Ahmad V. D.I.O.S., Allahabad and another
665
since 1982. The entire amount is to be
paid within a period of two months from
today. The future salary of the petitioner
shall also be paid by 7th of succeeding
month.

Sd/- Hon. M.P.Singh, J.

3.2.89"

10. In view of the interim order
passed by this Court, the question
regarding promotion in L.T. grade has
thus become redundant.

11. It is submitted that during the
pendency of the writ petition, one A.H.
Siddiqui, a permanent Lecturer, retired on
30.6.1995 again causing vacancy on
1.7.1995 and further that the Committee
of Management by resolution dated
15.7.95 has recommended the name of the
petitioner for promotion in Lecturer
grade.
The
Committee
has
also
submitted/forwarded
all
the
relevant
papers to the D.I.O.S. Allahabad for
approval of his appointment.

12. A counter affidavit has also been
filed on behalf of D.I.O.S. Allahabad, in
which it has been stated that there is no
doubt that the Management has power to
promote the petitioner which does not
have any concern with the D.I.O.S. There
is no denial in the counter affidavit that
the post of Lecturer is to be filled only by
way of promotion and the petitioner is
only a qualified teacher to be promoted in
Lecturer grade.

13. However, respondent no. 1, the
District Inspector of Schools did not pass
any order on the papers for approval for
promotion of the petitioner in Lecturer
grade. He, on the other hand, asked the
Management that since the matter for
promotion is pending in the writ petition,
the orders ought not to have been passed.

14. In view of the facts stated above,
the writ petition succeeds and is allowed.
The District Inspector of Schools is
directed to pass appropriate orders on the
papers in respect of the petitioner sent to
him for approval of the promotion of the
petitioner in pursuance of the resolution
of the Committee of Management dated
15.7.95 recommending the promotion of
the petitioner in Lecturer grade, within a
period of two months from the date of
production of a certified copy of this
order. No order as to costs.
---------
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 10.09.2002

BEFORE
THE HON'BLE S.K. SEN, C.J.
THE HON'BLE R.K. AGARWAL, J.

Special Appeal No. 140 of 1996

Ram Kinkar Tripathi

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

Counsel for the Appellant:
Sri H.N. Singh

Counsel for the Respondents:
Sri Sabhajeet Yadav
S.C.

Constitution
of
India,
Article
226-
Revision of Pay Scale - post of staff
instructor- appointment under Provincial
Kshiksha Dal- created by G.O. dated
12.12.64-appointed
on
14.1.64-
Pay
scale
of
other
state
government
employees revised w.e.f. 1979- but the
Government accepted the Revision of
Pay Scale w.e.f. 1.1.86- No justification