IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (S/S) No. 92 of 2004 Dunger Singh Parihar ….Petitioner. Versus District Inspector of Schools Bageshwar and others …Respondents. Present : Mr. B.S. Adhikari, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. N.P. Sah, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral) Heard Mr. B.S. Adhikri, Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. N.P. Sah, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand. The petitioner is serving on a class IV post in a private school, which is under grant in aid. The school came under grant in aid in the year 2003. In the said school, by order dated 20.6.2003 (which has been annexed by the petitioner as R.A. 1 to the rejoinder affidavit), certain posts were created i.e. one post of Principal, six posts of Lecturers, one post of Head Clerk and one post of “Daftari”. Posts of six L.T. Grade teachers, one assistant clerk and four class IV employees were already existing in the school. Order dated 20.6.2003 further says that posts of Head Clerk and “Daftari” shall be filled by way of promotion. Implication would be that the post of Assistant Clerk, which now comes under grant in aid, as other posts shall be filled by way of direct recruitment. The committee of management on 5.7.2003 passed a resolution stating that the petitioner be promoted to the post of “Daftari”. On this resolution, which was sent for approval to the education authority, the present petitioner raised an objection stating that since he has been working as Class IV employee for the last more than 20 years, he is liable to be promoted not as “Daftari” but Assistant Clerk. Consequently, the committee of management passed another resolution on 16.9.2003 2 resolving that the petitioner be promoted to the post of assistant clerk. This resolution of the committee has not received the approval. The respondents in the counter affidavit have contended that the petitioner could not be promoted on the post of assistant clerk inasmuch as the post of assistant clerk has to be filled by way of direct recruitment. This fact is also evident from the letter dated 23.9.2003, annexed as annexure no. 5 to the writ petition, which states that the post of assistant clerk could only be filled by way of direct recruitment. This being the admitted position of law, such a resolution given in favour of the petitioner for promoting him to the post of assistant clerk could not have been made and consequently the approval therefore has rightly not been given by the education authority. In view of the aforesaid, no relief can be granted to the petitioner. Writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 15.9.2011 Avneet