# Laxmi Shankar Bajpai v. Additional Director of Education

- **Citation:** (2008) 3 ILRA 781
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2008-08-08
- **Case number:** Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 37468 of 2008
- **Bench:** Rajes Kumar
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/laxmi-shankar-bajpai-v-additional-director-of-education-41193
- **Pages:** 3

## Headnote

Constitution
of
India-Art.
226Appointment of Principal by Transferduly selection through selection boardchallenged by an officiating principal-in
absence of regular selected candidate
held-No right to continue after joining of
selected candidate-nor has right to resist
the
posting-petition
misconceiveddismissed.

Held: Para 5 & 7

Admittedly, the petitioner was officiating
as a principal in the college. He is not the
regular principal and was acting as an
officiating principal in the absence of the
appointment of any permanent principal.
Dr.
Ajai
Pal
Singh
was
appointed
principal by way of selection by the
Board and was regular principal in the
CPKU
Inter
College,
Moosa
Nagar,
Kanpur Dehat and had a right to claim
for the transfer. His transfer has been
made against the vacancy existed in
Gangadeen Gaurishankar Inter College
Kanpur Nagar on the recommendation of
the Committee of Management of both
the colleges. Therefore the transfer of
Dr. Ajai Pal Singh cannot be said to be
illegal by any means. Moreover, the
petitioner being an officiating principal
cannot challenge the transfer of a
permanent principal and cannot claim to
be retained in the college as officiating
principal.

In the present case, the petitioner is not
a selected candidate on the post of
principal and was only officiating on the
post of principal in the absence of any
permanent principal and, therefore, had
no right to challege the transfer of the
respondent no.6 Dr. Ajai Pal Singh.
Case law discussed:
(2007) 3 UBLBEC, 2497.
782 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2008

## Text

3 All] Laxmi Shankar Bajpai V. Addl. Director of Education (Secondary) and others
781

13. In the present case, the tribunal
has simply thrown out the matter on the
ground of the delay. It is alleged that the
entire money has already been deposited
in the court below.

14. In the facts and circumstances of
the case, I remand the matter to the
tribunal for reconsideration afresh with
regard to the matter relating to fraud. In
pursuance of the award, the money which
had been deposited before the tribunal
will not be released in favour of the
claimant-respondents, until the tribunal
decides the application for recall afresh as
moved by the petitioner. The claimantrespondents shall also be given every
opportunity of hearing in establishing
their case. The matter on remand will be
heard by the tribunal expeditiously, if
possible, within a period of three months
from the date of presentation of a certified
copy of this order being placed before it.
The order dated 31.05.2008 passed by
respondent no. 1 in Misc. case no. 5 of
2007 is set aside.

15. The writ petition is disposed of
as above.
---------
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 08.08.2008

BEFORE
THE HON'BLE RAJES KUMAR, J.

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 37468 of 2008

Laxmi Shankar Bajpai
...Petitioner
Versus
Additional
Director
of
Education
(Secondary) and others ...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner:
Sri J.P. Mishra
Sri Indra Raj Singh
Counsel for the Respondents:
Sri Kr. R.C. Singh
Sri Shyam Singh Sengar
Sri Arun Kumar Singh
Sri Neeraj Tiwari

Constitution
of
India-Art.
226Appointment of Principal by Transferduly selection through selection boardchallenged by an officiating principal-in
absence of regular selected candidate
held-No right to continue after joining of
selected candidate-nor has right to resist
the
posting-petition
misconceiveddismissed.

Held: Para 5 & 7

Admittedly, the petitioner was officiating
as a principal in the college. He is not the
regular principal and was acting as an
officiating principal in the absence of the
appointment of any permanent principal.
Dr.
Ajai
Pal
Singh
was
appointed
principal by way of selection by the
Board and was regular principal in the
CPKU
Inter
College,
Moosa
Nagar,
Kanpur Dehat and had a right to claim
for the transfer. His transfer has been
made against the vacancy existed in
Gangadeen Gaurishankar Inter College
Kanpur Nagar on the recommendation of
the Committee of Management of both
the colleges. Therefore the transfer of
Dr. Ajai Pal Singh cannot be said to be
illegal by any means. Moreover, the
petitioner being an officiating principal
cannot challenge the transfer of a
permanent principal and cannot claim to
be retained in the college as officiating
principal.

In the present case, the petitioner is not
a selected candidate on the post of
principal and was only officiating on the
post of principal in the absence of any
permanent principal and, therefore, had
no right to challege the transfer of the
respondent no.6 Dr. Ajai Pal Singh.
Case law discussed:
(2007) 3 UBLBEC, 2497.
782 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2008
(Delivered by Hon'ble Rajes Kumar, J.)

1. By means of the present writ
petition, the petitioner is challenging the
transfer order dated 22.07.2008 passed by
the Additional Director of Education
(Secondary), U.P., Allahabad by which
Dr. Ajai Pal Singh has been transferred
from CPKU Inter College, Moosa Nagar,
Kanpur
Dehat
to
Gangadeen
Gaurishankar
Inter
College,
Kanpur
Nagar.

2. The petitioner claims to be senior
most lecturer in Gangadeen Gaurishankar
Inter College, Kanpur Nagar an institution
duly
recognized
under
the
U.P.
Intermediate Education Act, 1921 and it
was governed under U.P. Act No.24 of
1971, Act No.5 of 1982 and the Rules
framed thereunder. On the retirement of
Harish Narain Bajpai on 30.06.2006, who
was the officiating principal of the
college, Sri Jagat Narain Dwivedi took
the charge of the college as officiating
principal and continued upto February,
2007 and thereafter w.e.f. 8th February,
2007, the petitioner became the officiating
principal of the college. Learned counsel
for the petitioner submitted that by the
transfer and appointment of Dr. Ajai Pal
Singh as principal of the college the right
of the petitioner has been infringed.

3. Sri Arun Kumar Singh and Sri
R.C. Singh, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of Dr. Ajai Pal Singh and learned
Standing Counsel appears on behalf of
other respondents submitted that Dr. Ajai
Pal Singh was selected by the U.P.
Secondary Education Services Selection
Board and was appointed as a principal in
CPKU Inter College, Moosa Nagar,
Kanpur Dehat and was working as
Principal in the said college. As the post
of
the
principal
of
Gangadeen
Gaurishankar
Inter
College,
Kanpur
Nagar was vacant, he applied for the
transfer and his transfer has been
recommended by the Committee of
Managements of CPKU Inter College,
Moosa Nagar, Kanpur Dehat as well as
Gangadeen Gaurishankar Inter College,
Kanpur Nagar and accordingly, he has
been transferred. Necessary papers in this
regard has been produced before this
Court. He further submitted that Dr. Ajai
Pal Singh has given the charge as
principal of CPKU Inter College, Moosa
Nagar, Kanpur Dehat on 23.07.2008 and
has taken over charge as principal of
Gangadeen Gaurishankar Inter College,
Kanpur
Nagar
on
24.07.2008.
The
signatures of Dr. Ajai Pal Singh has been
attested by Prabandh Sanchalak of the
college and also by the District Inspector
of Schools on 24.07.2008. Papers in this
regard has also been produced before this
Court. He further submitted that the
petitioner was simply officiating on the
post of principal in the absence of any
permanent principal. Therefore, he has no
right to challenge the transfer order
inasmuch
as
he
cannot
claim
his
continuity to officiate as principal in the
college
after
the
appointment
of
permanent principal.

4. Having heard the learned counsel
for the parties, I have perused the relevant
papers.

5. Admittedly, the petitioner was
officiating as a principal in the college.
He is not the regular principal and was
acting as an officiating principal in the
absence of the appointment of any
permanent principal. Dr. Ajai Pal Singh
was appointed principal by way of
selection by the Board and was regular
3 All] Royon International School Karmchari Sangh V. State of U.P. and others
783
principal in the CPKU Inter College,
Moosa Nagar, Kanpur Dehat and had a
right to claim for the transfer. His transfer
has been made against the vacancy
existed in Gangadeen Gaurishankar Inter
College
Kanpur
Nagar
on
the
recommendation of the Committee of
Management
of
both
the
colleges.
Therefore the transfer of Dr. Ajai Pal
Singh cannot be said to be illegal by any
means. Moreover, the petitioner being an
officiating principal cannot challenge the
transfer of a permanent principal and
cannot claim to be retained in the college
as officiating principal.

6. The decision cited by the learned
counsel for the petitioner of this Court in
the case of Asha Singh Versus State of
U.P. and others reported in (2007) 3
UBLBEC, 2497 is not applicable to the
present case as the facts of that case was
entirely different. In that case, in
pursuance of the advertisement published
by the U.P. Secondary Education Services
Selection Board, Allahabad for the
appointment as L.T. Grade Teacher in the
subject of Physical Education. The
petitioner applied and was successful in
the
written
examination
and
was,
therefore, invited for participation in the
Interview on 15.05.2006. The petitioner
was selected for the post of L.T. Grade
Teacher in Physical Education and
empaneled against the vacancy which was
available in Indian Girls Inter College
Allahabad. On these facts, the petitioner
challenged the transfer on the ground that
once the vacancy was advertised on a
requisition made by the Committee of
Management by the U.P. Secondary
Education
Services
Selection
Board,
Allahabad,
the
Committee
of
Management looses its discretion to resort
to mode of appointment by way of
transfer and then it is only by direct
recruitment on the recommendation of the
U.P.
Secondary
Education
Services
Selection Board, Allahabad that any
appointment
against
the
vacancy
advertised can be made.

7. In the present case, the petitioner
is not a selected candidate on the post of
principal and was only officiating on the
post of principal in the absence of any
permanent principal and, therefore, had
no right to challege the transfer of the
respondent no.6 Dr. Ajai Pal Singh.

8. In this view of the matter, the writ
petition is devoid of any merit and is,
accordingly, dismissed.
---------
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 08.08.2008

BEFORE
THE HON'BLE RAKESH TIWARI, J.

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 27426 of 2006

Royon International School Karamchari
Sangh, Gautam Budh Nagar. ...Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. and others ...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner:
Miss. Bushra Maryam

Counsel for the Respondents:
Sri Vishwa Ratan Dwivedi
S.C.

U.P. Industrial Dispute Act, 1947-Section
4-K-Rejection to refer the dispute-on the
ground of locustandi-as the petitioner
being union is not within meaning of
aggrieved
party-held-without
jurisdiction-reference
based
on
subjective satisfaction-an administrative
function-order of refusal on denial to