U.P. Intermediate Education Act | No 'Deemed Appointment' Of Selected Candidate If DIOS Doesn't Give Approval Within 15 Days : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has held that the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 does not contemplate ‘deemed appointment’ of a candidate if the District Inspector of Schools (“DIOS”) does not approve the proposal for appointment of the candidate within 15 days period, as given under Regulation 18 of the ‘Regulation under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921’. The selection process of the candidate concludes only after the mandatory approval of the DIOS is granted.The Bench comprising of Justice Dinesh Maheshwari and Justice Sanjay Kumar, while adjudicating an appeal filed in The State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. v Rachna Hills & Ors., has held that Section 16-FF(3)of U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 itself makes approval by DIOS mandatory for appointment to the post of teacher. Therefore, a Regulation made under the said Act could not have provided for a ‘deemed appointment’. Subordinate legislation cannot transcend the prescription of a statutory provision.BACKGROUND FACTSIn Uttar Pradesh, the Schools and intermediate educational institutions are governed by the Uttar Pradesh Intermediate Education Act, 1921 (“Intermediate Act”) and Regulations under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 (“Regulations”). Section 16-FF of the Intermediate Act and Regulation 17 of the Regulations provide the procedure for the selection and appointment of Heads of Institutions and Teachers in minority institutions. Further, Section 16-FF(3) of the Intermediate Act mandates that no person selected as a Teacher shall be appointed unless the proposal for appointment is approved by the District Inspector of Schools (“DIOS”). Two aided minority institution initiated the process of selection of Assistant Teachers and forwarded their proposals to the DIOS for approval. Before the requisite approval was granted, the Government amended Regulation 17, prescribing a new procedure for selection w.e.f. 12.03.2018. The amended Regulation 17 now prescribes a written examination for the selection of Teachers in minority institutions. Consequently, the DIOS returned the proposal of institutions for compliance with the new procedure. The Institutions filed a writ petition before the High Court, challenging the DIOS’ decision requiring the Management to follow the new Rules. The Single Judge of High Court set aside the decision and directed the DIOS to reconsider the decision, on the ground that the amended Regulations would not apply as the selection process had attained finality.In compliance of the High Court order, the DIOS passed an order stating that the selection process did not culminate in the grant of approval under Section 16-FF of the Intermediate Act and the selection is not final. The DIOS observed that before the appointment of Teachers could be approved, the Regulations stood amended, necessitating compliance with the new procedure for selection. The selected candidates filed another writ petition before the High Court challenging the decision of DIOS. The High Court held that once the Management forwards the names of selected candidates to the DIOS for approval, the selection process concludes and the proposed candidates acquire a vested right to be appointed. The High Court relied on a principle that the selection process with respect to vacancies which arose prior to the amendment of the Regulations would be governed by the unamended Regulations. The State of U.P. filed an appeal before the Supreme Court challenging the High Court’s order. SUPREME COURT VERDICTSubordinate legislation cannot transcend the prescription of a statutory provisionThe candidates while relying on Regulation 18 of the Regulations argued if the DIOS fails to grant approval within 15 days of the proposal made by the Management, then the proposed candidates shall be deemed to have been appointed. On this issue the Bench observed that Section 16-F of the Intermediate Act provides for the constitution a of Selection Committees and Section 16-FF specifically relates to minority institutions. Further, Regulation 18(1) of Regulations provide the time within which an order of appointment is to be issued by a Manager to the selected candidate. When a Selection Committee constituted under Section 16F(1) or (2) makes recommendation, an order of appointment is to be issued within 15 days of the receipt of the said recommendation. However, in the case of minority institutions, the order of appointment it is to be issued within 15 days of the receipt of the approval of the authority specified therein. The Bench observed as under:“Neither Section 16-FF of the Act nor Regulation 18 provides the period within which approval is to be accorded. Further, neither of the two provisions provide for deemed appointment in the event of delay in granting approval. Therefore, unless the approval contemplated under Section 16-FF(3) is accorded, no appointment could take place.In any case, when the relevant statutory provision, i.e. Section 16-FF(3) itself makes approval by...

U.P. Intermediate Education Act | No 'Deemed Appointment' Of Selected Candidate If DIOS Doesn't Give Approval Within 15 Days : Supreme Court

Pallavi Mishra

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Pallavi Mishra

U.P. Intermediate Education Act | No 'Deemed Appointment' Of Selected Candidate If DIOS Doesn't Give Approval Within 15 Days : Supreme Court

Pallavi Mishra

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Pallavi Mishra

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers